Sei sulla pagina 1di 121

ENVIRONMENTALLYFRIENDLY INLANDWATERWAYSHIPDESIGN FORTHEDANUBERIVER

WorldWideFundforNatureInternational DanubeCarpathianProgramme (WWFDCP) ProjectName:DanubeNavigation ProjectNumber:9E0726.04 ContractNumber:066/FY09 ProjectExecutedby:DejanRadojcic ProjectLocation:RepublicofSerbia DateofAgreement:01January2009 ShortDescriptionofAssignment:Developingconcept forshipdesignfortheDanubeRiverconditions

Page

ABBREVATIONS,ACRONYMSandNOMENCLATURE

0.

METHODOLOGY 8 TERMSOFREFERENCE9 INTRODUCTION10


WhatisanoptimalIWWship? 10 Importanceofthewaterway 11 RestrictionsoftheDanubewaterway(withitstributaries) 11 TheDanube13 SomecriticalpointsontheLowerDanube 14 TheDanubeTributaries 15 ImpactofclimatechangeonDanubenavigation 17 Concludingremarks 17

1.

2.
2.1. 2.2. 2.3. 2.3.1. 2.3.2. 2.3.3. 2.3.4. 2.4. 3.1. 3.2. 3.3. 3.4.

3. BASICAPPROACHTOINLANDVESSELHYDRODYNAMICS
Shallowwaterresistance Propulsiveefficiencyinshallowwater Washproblems Concludingremarks

19
19 22 22 22

4. INTERMODALITYANDIWT
4.1. 4.2. 4.3. 4.4.

25
26 26 27 28

Transhipmentsandcargohandlingequipment StateoftheartofIntermodalLoadingUnits(ILU) Thehinterland Concludingremarks

5. WATERBORNEPARTOFTRANSPORT
5.1. 5.1.1. 5.1.2. 5.1.3. 5.1.4. Stateoftheart Selfpropelledvessel Bargetrains Barges Pushboats

30
30 30 34 37 38

5.2. 5.2.1. 5.2.2. 5.2.3. 5.2.4. 5.3.

Conceptsofresearchedinlandvesselsforcargotransport 41 SelfpropelledvesselINBISHIP 41 PushboatsandbargesforextremelyshallowwaterVEBISandINBATprojects41 SomeotherprojectssimilartotheINBATandINBISHIPprojects 43 Conceptsofadvancedvessels 45 Concludingremarks 46

6.
6.1. 6.2. 6.3. 6.4. 6.5.

CHARACTERISTICSOFSELFPROPELLEDCONTAINERVESSELS ADAPTEDTOTHEDANUBEWATERWAY
Maximalvesseldimensions Transporteconomy Hydrodynamicanalysis Hullweightconsiderations Concludingremarks

47
47 49 50 52 52

7.
7.1. 7.1.1. 7.1.2. 7.2. 7.2.1. 7.2.2. 7.2.3. 7.2.4. 7.2.5. 7.2.6. 7.2.7. 7.2.8. 7.3. 7.3.1. 7.3.2. 7.3.3. 7.3.4. 7.3.5.

TECHNICALMEASURESTOMAKEINLANDSHIPSCLEANER ANDMOREEFFICIENT 54
Improvementsinhullresistance(withtheaimtoreduceRT) 55 Shipform 55 Shipweightreduction 57 Innovationsinpropulsionandtransmissions(withtheaimtoincreaseDS)59 Screwpropellers 59 Transmissionofpower 60 Propulsorsteeringcapabilities 60 Innovativepropellerbasedconcepts 61 Promisingpropellerbasedpropulsors 62 Otherpropulsors 64 Ratingofpropulsors 66 ImprovementofHullPropulsorinteractions 67 Innovationsinpropulsionplantsandfuels(withtheaimtoreducefuel consumptionandpollutantemissions) 68 Dieselengines 68 Emissionproblems 68 Exhaustemissionlegislation 69 FindingsfromtheCREATINGproject 69 Innovationsinpropulsionplants 73

7.4. 7.5.

Innovationsimportantforbettershiputilisation/navigation(withtheaim toreduceshipspeedandincreasecosteffectivenessandsafety) 75 Concludingremarks 77

8. PROPOSEDSOLUTIONSFORTHEDANUBERIVER
8.1. 8.1.1. 8.1.2. 8.1.3. 8.2. 8.2.1. 8.2.2. 8.2.3. 8.3. 8.4.

79

Selfpropelledshipfortransportofcontainers 79 ProposedfeaturesofaDanubecontainershipconcept 80 Generalarrangementplanofacontainershipconcept 82 Advantagesofaconceptcomparedtoconventionalships 84 Bargetrainfortransportofbulkcargo 87 Proposedfeaturesofapushboatconcept 88 Generalarrangementplanofapushboatconcept 90 Advantagesofaconceptcomparedtoconventionalpushboats 92 Conversionandretrofittingmeasuresthatcanleadtogreenernavigation92 Thecostofnewbuildings 93

9. CONCLUSIONS REFERENCES

94 95

APPENDICIES

99

Appendix1TheOECDPublicationInlandWarerways&EnvironmentalProtection100 Appendix2Impactsofclimatechange 104 Appendix3WaveWashProducedbyHighSpeedCraft 107 Appendix4PossibleShipPollutants 111 112 Appendix5ApplicationofSPStoDanubeBargeHullStructure Appendix6StatisticsonInlandWaterwayTransportandDanubeTransport 116 Appendix7RecentIMOactivities 120

ABBREVATIONS,ACRONYMSandNOMENCLATURE

Abbreviations
ADN EuropeanagreementconcerningtheinternationalcarriageifdangerousgoodsinIWT ADND/ADNR CarriageofdangerousgoodsontheDanube/Rhine AIS AutomaticIdentificationSystem ATM AdvisingTempomaat BD Biodiesel BDB BiodieselBlend CEC CentralEuropeanCountries CCNR CentralCommissionfortheNavigationontheRhine CPP ControllablePitchPropeller CRP ContraRotatingPropeller DGTREN EuropeanCommission,GeneralDirectorateforEnergyandTransport DMCanal DanubeMainCanal DPC DanubeProjectCentre,Belgrade DST DevelopmentCentreforShipTechnologyandTransportSystems(VBD),Duisburg(DE) ECDIS ElectronicChartDisplayandInformationSystem ECE UnitedNationsEconomicCommissionforEurope EE EastEuropean EILU EuropeanIntermodalLoadingUnit EPA EnvironmentalProtectionAgency(UnitedStates) ERT EmissionReductionTechnologies EST EnvironmentallySustainableTransport ESTR EquivalentSemiTrailers ETA EstimatedTimeofArrival FC FuelCell FEU FortyfeetEquivalentUnit(ISO40container) FPP FixedPitchPropeller GL GermanischerLloyd GMS Grossmotorschiff GRP GlassReinforcedPlastic HWL HighWaterLevel ILU IntermodalLoadingUnit IMP IntegralMotorPropeller INE InlandNavigationEurope ISO InternationalStandardOrganization IT InformationTechnology ITTC InternationalTowingTankConference IWT InlandWaterTransport JRB YugoslavShippingCompany IWW InlandWaterWay LNG LiquefiedNaturalGas LNRL LowNavigationandRegulationLevel LoLo LoadonLoadoff LR LloydsRegister

LSF MARIN NGE O/D PIANC PMF RCD RDP RIS RoLa RoRo SCR SEEC SES SPP SPS SWL TEN TEU ToR VBD WEC WP WWF

LowSulphurFuel MaritimeInstituteofNetherlands,Wageningen NaturalGasEngine OriginDestination PermanentInternationalAssociationofNavigationCongresses ParticulateMatterFilter RecreationalCraftDirective(UnitedStates) RimDrivenPropeller RiverInformationServices RoadRailcombinedtransport RollonRolloff SelectiveCatalyticReduction SouthEastEuropeanCountries SurfaceEffectShip SurfacePiercingPropeller SandwichPlateSystem SafeWorkingLoad TransEuropeanNetwork TwentyfeetEquivalentUnit(ISO20container) TermsofReference VersuchsanstaltfurBinnenschiffbaue.V.Duisburg(nowDST),Germany WestEuropeanCountries WorkPackage WorldWideFundforNature

ProjectsAcronyms
ConsortiumforOperationalManagementPlatformforRiverInformation Services(FP5Project) COVEDA ContainerVesselsfortheDanubewaterway(DPCProject) CREATING ConceptstoReduceEnvironmentalimpactandAttainoptimalTransport performancebyInlandNaviGation(FP6Project) EUDET EvaluationoftheDanubewaterwayasakeyEuropeanTransport resource(FP4Project) INBAT InnovativeBargeTrain(FP5Project) INBISHIP NewOpportunitiesforInlandWaterwayTransport(BRITEEURAMProject) KLIWAS Consequencesofclimatechangefornavigablewaterwaysandoptionsforthe economyandinlandnavigation(NationalGermanproject) MUTAND MultimodalRoRoTransportontheDanuberiver(DPC&DSTproject) PASCAT PartialAircushionSupportedCatamaran(GROWTHProgramme) PELS ProjectEnergysavingAirLubricatedShips(NationalDutchresearchproject) SMOOTH SustainableMethodsforOptimaldesignandOperationofShipswithairlubricaTed Hulls(FP6Project) SPIN StrategiesforPromotingInlandNavigation(GROWTHProgramme) VEBIS Improvementoftheefficiencyofinlandwatertransportation(GermanProject) ELWIS,DORIS,ALSODanube,CRORIS,YURISNationalRISprojects 6 COMPRIS

Nomenclature
B cT CC dwt DP F FNh FnL g h hWLNRL hAHWL H L mlig mc n nH PB PD r Ri RT Rv Rw T v D S Vesselbeam(m) Trainformationcoefficient(RT/Ri) Coefficientofcontainertransportefficiency(no.containerskm/h/kW) Deadweight(t) Propellerdiameter(m) Freeboard(HT)(m) Froudenumberbasedonwaterdepth(v/(gh)) Froudenumberbasedonwaterlinelength(v/(gL)) Gravitationalacceleration(m/s2) Waterdepth(m) WaterdepthbyLNRL(m) AirclearanceoverHWL(m) Vesselheightordepth(m) Vessellength(m) Lightshipmass(t) Containermass(t) Numberofcontainersonboard Numberofcontainerlayers Installedpower(kW) Deliveredpower(kW) Resistanceratio(Rwh/Rw) Individualresistanceofeachbarge(kN) Totalresistance(kN) Viscousresistance(kN) Subscripts Wavemakingresistance(kN) hFinitewaterdepth(shallowwater) Vesseldraught(m) Infinitewaterdepth(deepwater) Vesselspeed(km/h) OAOverall Propulsiveefficiency Shaftefficiency

0. METHODOLOGY
Introductorypart(Sections2,3and4) First,asanintroduction,restrictionsoftheDanubewaterway(anditstributaries)aregiven,as restrictions in water depth, lock size and bridge heights dictate main ship dimensions. This is followed by sections (probably complicated to a nontechnical reader) on shallow water hydrodynamics which is important for design and operation of every vessel intended to navigate in inland waterways. Basic knowledge about transhipment possibilities, intermodal loadingunits,logisticsandassociatedproblemsisalsoessentialastheseinfluenceshipdesign. Waterbornetransport(Sections5and6) Waterborne transport is in the focus of this study, so stateoftheart of selfpropelled vessels andbargetrainsfollows.Specialattentionisgiventodesignofselfpropelledcontainervessels fortheDanubewaterway(Section6)asthey,perse,actuallydonotexist(likeontheRhine). Measurestomakeinlandshipscleanerandmoreefficient(Section7) Adiscussionfollowsonshipcomponents(propulsors,machinery,etc.)andachievementsthat leadtofuelefficiency;thisisimportantforthedesignofinnovativeDanubevessels.Theseare recent achievements in ship resistance, propulsion, engines, construction and ship utilization. Someoftheachievementsthatarementionedwillbeimplementedinthedesignsofproposed conceptsfortheDanube(giveninSection8). ProposedconceptsfortheDanubeRiver(Section8) Finally,thereportgivesasectionondesignofconceptsforcontainerandbulkcargotransport. These concepts fulfil contemporary ecological demands, apply innovative technologies, and obey the existing waterway restrictions explained above. The designs proposed are a selfpropelledvesselforcontainertransportandbargetrainforbulkcargotransport. Appendices Topicstreatedintheappendicesgivesomeextrainformationusefulforthesubject. Severalpartsofthisreportoriginatefromotherstudiesandpapersthatwerewrittenorco written by the author of this study (namely, SPIN, CREATING, COVEDA etc.). In the parentheses, after each section title, references are given from where most of the text/materialoriginatesfrom.Consequently,referencesaregivenwherevernecessary,except incasesexplainedabove.
8

1. TERMSOFREFERENCE

ThemostimportantitemsoftheTermsofReference(ToR)are: Information on shallow draught ship technology is needed to fine tune WWFs argumentsandpositionininlandnavigationontheDanube.

Knowledgeoninlandnavigationandinnovativeshipdesignsthatprovidetechnicallyand economicallyfeasiblealternativestopresentconceptsandtechnologyshouldbegiven. Proposedsolutionsshouldbeinharmonywithpresentecologicaldemands,i.e.should require less or no new infrastructure/river modification that negatively impacts river ecosystemsanddynamics.

Technical solutions should be proposed that adapt ships to the Danube River, in particulartotheshallowsectorsontheLowerDanube,butthatarealsoabletooperate ontheDanubetributariesandDanubeMainCanal.

Transportofcontainerandbulkcargoshouldbeconsidered;attentionshouldbepaidto upgrading/retrofittingpresentvesselsandtothenewships.

2. INTRODUCTION[SPIN,COVEDA]
2.1. WhatisanoptimalIWWship? There are several definitions of optimal ship, one of them, according to Zigic (2008), define optimalshipas: Modernandenvironmentallyfriendly Withlowexhaustemissions Withlowfuelconsumption Economicalinoperation Highlycompatiblewiththewaterway Havecapabilitytoaligntotheriver Haveminimalimpactsonbankvegetationandfishfauna.

Allowedwaterdepth,thatchangesalongtheriverandduringtheseason,shouldbespecially analysedasitinfluencestransportperformancethroughshipcarryingcapacityandspeed(see Figure2.1).

Figure2.1Influenceofwaterdepthonshippayloadandspeed(Source:Zigic,2008) Operationalcostsaredramaticallyreducedwithincreaseofwaterdepth,i.e.increaseofvessel draught. Nevertheless, during the low water levels, the ship should be able to operate with restrictedeconomicaleffects.Thesameshipshouldbeabletooperateindeeperwatertoo,but will then be less efficient than the ship initially designed for deepwater operation only. Extremely shallow water, however, is often regarded as severe operational conditions. Therefore,transportcosts,howevercalculated,areverymuchinfluencedbywaterdepth. Alltransportmodestogreaterorsmallerextenthavesomenegativeimpactsonwater,air,soil bioticbalance,climaticconditions, health,andeconomy,tonameafew.Amongstthem,IWT seemstohavetheleasteffectsthatcanbequantified,forinstancethroughdirectandindirect

10

costs (see Appendix 6, and leaflets on Environment and Sustainability by INE www.inlandnavigation.org and Power of Inland Navigation by BVB). Direct costs are more or lessobvious,butindirectcostsaresomehowhiddenanddifficulttoquantify.Thereareother impactswhichareevenmoredifficulttoquantify,forinstanceaccidents,congestion,impacts onhumans,floraandfaunaetc.Anoptimalship,therefore,shouldcausetheleastimpactsthat arementionedabove.Thiscanbeachievedbya)applyingcontemporarydesignmeasures,and b) through making design compromises (sometimes it is necessary to sacrifice/reduce cost effectivenesstoobtainanoverallgoodandenvironmentallyacceptablevessel).

2.2.

Importanceofthewaterway

Generallyspeaking,themaincharacteristicsofallinland(river)vesselsaremoreorlesssimilar, i.e.theyhaverestricteddraught(T)duetotherestrictedwaterdepth(h).However,somerivers are deeper or are regulated and have minimal guaranteed water depth throughout the year, while others are shallower and/or unregulated. The most important European rivers differ mainlyintheabovementionedtheRhineisdeeperandregulated(which,however,requires many investments into fairway maintenance) while the Danube, although much longer and wider, is relatively shallow and unregulated river with large variations in water depths. Consequently, the main difference between Rhine and the Danube vessels is their draught, whichhasveryimportantconsequencesonseveralothershipparameters. Furthermore,theRhinepassesthroughthemostdevelopedpartofEurope,probablytheworld, so it is quite normal that several technical solutions applied on the Rhine vessels are copied/transferred to other river vessels, in this particular case to the Danube vessels. However,itshouldbeunderlinedthatoftenitisnotpossibletocopy/transfereveryserviceor technical solution due to the alreadymentioned waterway differences. Other differences are alsoimportant,forinstancehinterlandandinfrastructuredevelopmentalongtheRhineandthe Danube corridor (see Section 4.3), which actually dictate volume and type of cargo, transhipmentfacilities,intermodalloadingunitsetc. 2.3. RestrictionsoftheDanubewaterway(withitstributaries)

CharacteristicsofinlandvesselsfortheDanubewaterwaydependverymuchonthewaterway itself,i.e.itsdepth,heightofthebridgesandsizeoflocks.Therefore,themaincharacteristicsof theDanubewaterwayanditstributariesshouldbestatedhere(seeFigure2.2).

11

Figure2.2LocksandportsontheDanube(Source:TTSGroup) u k u )

12

2.3.1. TheDanube Accordingtoitsphysicalandgeographicalcharacteristics,theriverDanubeisofficiallydivided bytheDanubeCommissionintothreemainsectors:UpperDanube(SectorI),MiddleDanube (Sector II) and Lower Danube (Sector III). Each of these sectors is subdivided into sections accordingtodifferentnavigationalconditions(Table2.1).TheEUDETProjectshowed,however, that such division is partly out of date, and proposed a new division of the Danube, which differentiatethecanalised(articulated)sectionsfromthefreeflowingpartsofthewaterway. AlthoughtheEUDETdivisionrelatesbettertothepresentstateofDanubewaterway,thereis still not enough statistical analysis (especially concerning water depth) to cover it properly. Even in the EUDET study, waterway statistics are mostly given according to the Danube Commissionclassicalsubdivision. Themostimportantstatisticalinformation,fromthepointofviewofvesseldesign,iswaterway depth and the air clearance under the bridges. So, in Table 2.2 an attempt is made to re examinedifferentsources(e.g.EUDETandWESKA)todeducetheappropriatedataforwater depth at LNRL* and critical bridge heights at HWL**, and to implement them to the EUDET divisionoftheDanubewaterway.Numbersinbracketsindicatethatdifferentdatawerefound inthereferences. Table2.1DivisionofthewaterwaybytheDanubeCommission
Section I1 I2 I3 I4 II1 II2 II3 III1 III2 From Kelheim Passau Linz Vienna Gonyu Budapest MoldavaVeche Drobeta Braila Danubekm 2415 2227 2135 1929 1791 1646 1048 931 170 To Passau Linz Vienna Gonyu Budapest MoldavaVeche Drobeta Braila Sulina Danubekm 2227 2135 1929 1791 1646 1048 931 170 0

UpperDanubeSectorI

MiddleDanubeSectorII

LowerDanubeSectorIII

LNRL:LowNavigationandRegulationLevelisthewaterlevelthatcorrespondstotheflowavailablefor94%of durationofthenavigableseason,i.e.excludingthewinterperiodsofbreakofnavigationaffectedbyice. ** HWL: High Water Level is the water level that corresponds to the flow occurring at 1% of duration of the navigableseason.

13

Table2.2TheEUDETdivisionoftheDanubewithmainrestrictionsofthewaterway
Section KelheimStraubing Straubing Vilshofen VilshofenMelk MelkDurnstein DurnsteinVienna ViennaCunovo Cunovo Palkovicovo Palkovicovo Budapest Budapest Slankamen SlankamenIron GatesII IronGatesIIBala Arm Bala/BorceaArm Giurgeni GiurgeniBraila BrailaSulina BalaArm Cernavoda Cernavoda Giurgeni Cernavoda Constanta ChiliaArmBlack Sea Danubekm 24142324 23242249 22492038 20382008 20081921 19211853 18531811 18111646 16461215 1215863 863346 346240 240170 1700 346299 299240 640 1160 Remark canalised freeflowing (shallow) canalised freeflowing (shallow) canalised freeflowing (shallow) canalised freeflowing (shallow) freeflowing(good) canalised freeflowing freeflowing(good) freeflowing maritimesection freeflowing (shallow) freeflowing(good) navigablecanal freeflowing(good) Depthby LNRL (m) 2.9 2(1.7) 2.8 2.3(2.5) 2.8 2.2(2.5) 2.5 2.0(2.5) 2.5 Wellover2.5 2.3 2.7 2.4 7.32 Couldbe bypassed Over2.5 Wellover2.5 Over2.5 Airclearance overHWL(m),if lowerthen7.5m 6.03 4.73 6.36 6.65 6.7 6.7 Minimallock dimensions(m) Beam Length 12 190 2 24 230 2 24 230 2 24 230 234 275 234 310

ECEClass

VbVIb VIa VIb VIb VIb VIc VII VII VII VII VII VIc VII VIIVIc VIa VIc VII VIc VII

Note:Navigabilityofthefairwayisalsoinfluencedbythenaturalprofileofawatercoursethalweg(riverpathwithmaximum depthand/orvelocity).

2.3.2. SomecriticalpointsontheLowerDanube In order to improve navigation conditions, necessary water depth, width and minimal curve radiusaccordingtotheDanubeCommissionrecommendationsshouldbeatleast2.5m,150 180mand1000mrespectively.Nevertheless,duetovariousreasonswaterdepthonseveral
14

sectors,andinparticularonsomeLowerDanubesectors,islessthanrecommended.Justone exampleofcriticalsectors(identifiedbytheEUsTENTProgramme)are: Danubekm375to175(CalarasiBraila),and Danubekm531to521(Batinsector).

Amongst these, the Danube between km 346 and 300 (Bala Branch outlet to Black SeaCanal outlet at Cernavoda, Figure 2.3) is particularly critical for navigation during the dry seasons, withwaterdepthonsomesectorsofaround1.5monly.Consequently,shipsoftenhavetouse adetourviaBalaBorceaBranchwhichincreasesnavigationlengthtotheBlackSeaCanalfor around110km.Moreover,onewaynavigationandconvoydismantlingisoftennecessaryinthe BorceaBranch.

Figure2.3CriticalpointsonCalarasiBrailasector(Source:ISPA) 2.3.3. TheDanubeTributaries TheDanubehasmorethan30navigabletributaries,butonlythosehavingtheECEclassIIIand abovearegiveninTable2.3.SincethetributarieshaveamuchlowerclassthantheDanube, allowedvesseldimensionsarealsodepictedinTable2.3.TheRhineMainDanubewaterwayis showninFigure2.4.

15

Table2.3Navigable etributaries sandcanalsoftheDanu ube (Source:Manualon nDanubeNa avigation)

2.4RhineMainDanubeWaterway( (Rotterdam Sulina3467km) Figure2 (Sou urce:ManualonDanube eNavigation)


16

2.3.4. ImpactofclimatechangeonDanubenavigation It is difficult to estimate possible impacts from the climate change on Danube navigation. AccordingtoProspectsonthedevelopmentofinfrastructureandnavigationontheDanube, inthefuturetherewillprobablybemoreperiodsofintenserainfall(dangerofhighwater),but alsomoreandlongeraridperiods. AccordingtoarecentPIANCReport(seeAppendix2),shippingcompaniestrytorespondtothe phenomena of low water levels and floods in a way that it assures the reliability of inland navigation through adaptation of the fleet and new vessels of different design as well as light loading of current vessels and use of vessels with decreased draught. Increased and decreasedwaterlevels(andthereforewatervelocitiestoo);changeintimingofseasonalhigh andlowwaterandshorterdurationofrivericealsodemandbettermanoeuvringcapabilitiesof ships. The Federal Institute for Hydrology of the German Ministry of Transport is presently funding project KLIWAS, whose purpose is to develop a sound statement about the span of possible climate changes. In the same context see also proceedings of recent conference RhineschifffahrtundKlimawandel. 2.4. Concludingremarks Waterdepth a) b) c) OntheUpperDanubethemostcriticalstretchisbetweenStraubingandVilshofenwith hWLNRL<2m(accordingtosomestatisticseven1.7m). SeveralsectorsontheUpperDanube(upstreamtoBudapest)have hWLNRL=2.02.3m. AfewsectorsontheLowerDanube(downstreamofIronGatesII)have hWLNRL=2.32.4m.Accordingtosomestatisticswaterdepthoncriticalsectorsisas lowas1.5m,sodetourviaother(longer)routesisnecessary(Figure2.3). Elsewhere,hWLNRL>2.5m.OntheMiddleDanubethedepthisoftenover5m. Bridgeheightorairclearance ThemostcriticalbridgeheightsareagainontheUpperDanube,i.e.thebridgesinDeggendorf andPassauwithhAHWL=4.73mand6.36m,respectively.TheheightofRMDcanalbridgesis around 6 m. All other bridges upstream from Budapest are around 6.7 m. Downstream from BudapesthAHWL>7.5m.

d)

17

Sizeoflocks MostoftheDanubelockshavestandardEuropeandimension.Themostcriticaloneisupstream ofStraubingat12x190m(asalllocksofRDMcanal),whiletherestontheUpperDanubeare 2x24x190m.ThelocksbuiltbyexEastEuropeanCountriesareeven2x34x275(310)m (seeFigure2.5).

Figure2.5Djerdap1lock(Serbianside)fullandempty(Source:WitteveenBos) Implicationsonshipdesign Taking into account that a) an IWW vessel should be designed according to the particular waterway,andb)thatallaroundclearancebetweenthevessel(orhercargo)andbridge/river bottom/lockside should be at least 0.3 m, the maximal allowed vessel dimensions, with possibleminorrestrictionsinsailingduringthedryseasons,are For the whole Danube including the stretch upstream of StraubingVilshofen, as well as throughtheDMCanal:T<1.7m(probably2m),B11.45m. DownstreamofVilshofen:T<2.0m(probably2.5m),B23.4m. The length of selfpropelled vessels is practically unrestricted, while coupling train formation willbediscussedlater(seeTables2.2,2.3and5.1).Theairdraughtdependsonthebridges(see Tables2.2and2.3).
18

3. BASICAPPROACHTOINLANDVESSELHYDRODYNAMICS[SPIN]

Fuel consumption depends on power needed for propelling the vessel with a certain speed (neglectingtheconsumptionofgeneratingsetsandotherminorconsumersonboard).Various engine emissions (pollution) are also proportional to power installed (if variations which dependonenginetypeareignored).Obviously,itisofprimaryimportancetoreducethepower needed for moving the ship. This power is called the Brake power (PB); it depends on vessel speed(v),resistance(RT)andefficiencyofthepropulsors(D).Inparticular PB=RTv/DS. Althoughthisstatementmaylookcomplicatedtononengineers,elementarydiscussionofthe abovementionedwillclearlyindicatepossiblewaysforpowerreduction.Inaddition,someof thestatementswhichfollowwillbeneededlaterinthetext. 3.1. Shallowwaterresistance

Shallow water hydrodynamics is of primary importance for inland vessels and particularly for fast inland vessels. In shallow water, vessel resistance is very much different than in deep water,andmayplaythemostimportantroleininlandvesseldesign(seepowerspeeddiagram, Figure 3.1). Resistance RTh shows a pronounced peak (resistance increases) at the critical Froudenumber(criticalspeedwhichdependsonwaterdepth).Thismaybeexplainedwiththe growth,whichisthenfollowedbytheloss,oftransversewaves.So,althoughintheexpression above the total resistance RT was mentioned, in the shallow water only one resistance component the wave making resistance RW changes dramatically (total resistance RT consists of viscous resistance RV and wave making resistance RW). This phenomenon may be well expressed through the ratio of shallow water wave resistance to deep water wave resistancer=RWh/RW.Followingthislogic,threespeedregionsmaybedetected: subcriticalregionwheretheeffectsofwaterdeptharealmostnegligible criticalregionwhereRWhincreasesdramatically(risgreaterthan1) supercriticalregionwhereRWhmaybesmallerthanRW(risabitsmallerthan1). Theincreaseofwavemakingresistanceresistanceratiorinthecriticalregionisofprimary importanceforfastvesselsanddependsmainlyontheratioofh/L(whereLisvesselswaterline length).Thisiswelldepictedbya3DdiagramgiveninFigure3.2(HofmanandRadojcic1997, Hofman and Kozarski 2000), where FnL = v/(gL) is Froude number based on ship waterline
19

length. S Similarly, the socalled s e shallow water resistanc charts, sh ce hown in Figu ures 3.3 and 3.4, d indicate by gray scaling the crit tical region black and darkgray z d zones should be avoide In ed. Figure3.4,Fnh=v/( (gh)isthed depthFroud denumber(r relationbetw weentwoFr roudenumb bersis ll agrams are obtained by relative complica ely ated theore etical FnL = Fnh(h/L)). Al three dia calculatio ons.Neverth heless,thed diagramssho ownareuniv versal,simpleandthere eforeusefulsince theinflue entialparam metersthata aretiedtoge etherareonlyL,handvtheother rshipparameters (shipform manddimen nsions)arep practicallynotimportantandmayb beneglected. Furtherm more,accord dingtoHofm manandRadojcic(1997)theonlywa aytoavoidt thecriticalre egion (negative influence of water d e depth) is to avoid the critical re o e egion itself, i.e. the sp peeds correspo onding to Fnh 0.91.0 FnL 0.3 0, 0.4 and low values of h/L. This m f means that good n inlandve essels,particularlythef fastones,sh houldbede esignedacco ordingtothe ewaterdep pthh, orinbro oadersense,according tothepart ticularwaterway.Conse equently,th herightchoiceof vessel sp peed and waterline length should be decided in the very early design phases, since w y thereisn ntanypossibilitytoimp provethepo oorperform manceslater on(thisisn notthecasewith deep water seagoin vessels). Note, howe ng ever, that co ommercial v vessels navig gate at relat tively lowspee edsinthesubcriticalreg gion(corresp pondingtoFnh<0.60.7 F 7).

Figure3.1 1Powerspe eeddiagram m(subcritica alregion)ofa shipsailin ngindifferen ntwaterdep pths(Source e:SPINRhine e)

20

Figure3.2Shallowwaterresistanceratio

F L
0.70

Fh
1.40

super-critical region
3.0
0.60

super-critical region
1.20

1.5 2.0 4.0 3.0

2.0 1.5 1.0

0.50

1.00

critical region
0.40

0.80

critical region
5.0 4.0

1.0
0.30

5.0

0.60

0.20

sub-critical region
0.40

sub-critical region

0.10

0.20

0.00 0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

0.50

0.00 0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

0.40

0.45

0.50

h/L

h/L

Fig.3.3Shallowwaterresistancechart Fig.3.4Shallowwaterresistancechart

21

3.2.

Propulsiveefficiencyinshallowwater

Thedenominatorintheaboveequation(DS)iscalledthetotalpropulsiveefficiency,but sinceSisaround0.95regardlessofwaterdepth(i.e.transmissionlossesareusually5%),only Disoffurtherinterest(Disthepropulsiveefficiency,alsocalledquasipropulsiveefficiency). Propulsiveefficiencyvariationsinshallowwaterareexactlyoppositetoresistance,i.e.around thecriticalFroudenumber,Ddecreasescomparedtothevalueindeepwater(curveDasa f(Fnh) has a pronounced hollow around the critical speed, specifically around Fnh 0.9). This hollow(Dreduction),amongotherreasons,isexplainedbyincreasedpropellerloadingdueto increasedresistanceinshallowwater(HofmanandRadojcic1997,Radojcic1998). 3.3. Washproblems

High speed vessels generate large waves (followed by increase of wavemaking resistance), which may cause environmental problems (bank erosion) and endanger other users of the waterway. Waves generated by forward motion of a ship are called wavewash or just wash. The main wash problem is associated with the passage through a critical speed range and is particularly pronounced in shallow waters (see Figures 3.5 and 3.6). More about wave wash, andinparticularaboutwavewashproducedbyhighspeedcraft,isgivenintheAppendix3.

Figure3.5Typicalshallowwaterwavesystem(Source:MARIN) 3.4. Concludingremarks

Inland (shallow water) vessels should be designed (matched) according to waterway characteristics,i.e.thevesselsmainparameters(draught,length,propellersizeetc.)should beadjustedtothespecificwaterway.
22

Intheshallowwater,threecharacteristicregimesexist(seeFigure3.6): Subcritical(accordingtoITTC,belowFnh=0.7) Critical, where PB increases dramatically due to increased resistance and decreased propulsiveefficiency Supercritical, where PB may be smaller than in deep water due to smaller resistance andsomewhatlargerpropulsiveefficiency.

Figure3.6Changingofwavepatternofashipmovingatdifferentspeeds(Source:SPINRhine)

23

Byfarmostinlandvesselssailinthesubcriticalregime.Onlysomespecial,veryfast,inland vessels are capable of reaching the supercritical regime (in that case, they should pass through the critical regime as fast as possible due to enormous increase of demanded power). The regimeborders (and appropriate speeds) depend on the water depth h, which varies from one river/riversector to another river/riversector. Consequently, subcritical/ critical/supercriticalspeedrangeisdifferent,forinstance,fortheRhineandtheDanubeor forUpperandMiddleDanube. Highspeedvesselsgeneratelargewake(wash)whichmaycauseseriousbankerosion.So, the critical and nearcritical speeds should be avoided due to environmental reasons as well.


24

4. INTERMODALITYANDIWT[26thDuisburgColloquium]

By definition, intermodal freight transport means the transport of goods in one loading unit, usingtwoormoremodesoftransportsuccessively,withouthandlingthegoodsthemselves.As such, intermodal transport has its main potential in long distance transport. Efficient use of intermodal transport also requires implementation of logistics see Figure 4.1. (here, ISO containersandswapbodiesshouldberegarded,respectively,asstackableILUandunstackable ILUswapbody).

IW MULTIMODAL POSSIBILITES
IMPLEMENTATION OF LOGISTICS
-Lo Lo

ISO CONTAINER

HIGH DEVELOPED INFRASTRUCTURE (PORTS, RAILWAY, ROADWAY)

Ro

Ro

SWAP BODY SEMI TRAILER

LOW DEVELOPED INFRASTRUCTURE DR. VEHICLE + SEMITRAILER

TRANSPORT EFFICIENCY

Fig.4.1IWmultimodalpossibilities For intermodality that integrates IWT, the following links of the transport chain are generally necessary:

25

In both cases that are depicted in Figure 4.1 LoLo (container) technology and RoRo technology the first and last links (land transport) are more or less the same and are unavoidable.Therefore,furtherconsiderationinthisstudyislimitedtotherestofthetransport chain,i.e.twotranshipmentsandwaterbornetransport. The Intermodal Loading Units (ILU) in IWT are containers, semitrailers or swapbodies. Consequently,thepayloadisthegrossmassofloadedcontainer,semitraileroraswapbody. However,forRoRovesselsitisthedeckarea,notthemassofpayloadthatiscriticalinfact thekeymetricisthelengthofstandardlane,i.e.itisthelanemetersthataresold.Thus,for RoRo vessels the payload should be considered as payarea, whereas the key parameter for the container vessel is the number of TEUs, i.e. the payload should be considered as pay volume. In any case, proper relation between cargo space and cargo weight is of utmost importance;wellbalancedshipshaveagoodratioofcargovolumetocargoweight. 4.1. Transhipmentsandcargohandlingequipment As is well known, the transhipment of containers and other stackable ILUs to/from container vesselshastobedonevertically(hencetheabbreviationLoLoforLoadonLoadoff),contrary tothehorizontaltranshipments(onwheels)ofvariouskindsofcargo(RollonRolloff). LoLotranshipmentofcontainersisefficientonlyifdedicatedequipmentisused,asforinstance spreaders, expensive gantry cranes (for massive transhipment of containers), reach stackers (for smaller terminals), etc. Otherwise, transhipment will be relatively slow and therefore inefficient.Furthermore,forsuccessfulutilizationofcontainertechnologyitisoftennecessary to have transhipment equipment also at final destination and origin points in the hinterland, ratherthanjustintheports,withthenecessaryexpertiseandexperienceinuseatallpoints. Nonstackableswapbodiesaresometimesalsotranshippedvertically,bygrapplerarms(side lift instead of toplift). In that case some additional space between swapbodies is needed. FurtherdiscussionabouttranshipmentpossibilitiesofvariousILUsisbeyondthescopeofthis study. 4.2. StateoftheartofIntermodalLoadingUnits(ILU)

Stackable ISO containers often called maritime containers are assumed here and their 20 feetequivalentunits(TEU)are6.06x2.44x2.44m(accordingly,40feetcontaineris12.19m long). Other ILUs (domestic containers, swapbodies, semitrailers) are slightly wider having 2.50to2.60mouterwidthandallowmorepalletstobepackedintothem.Thatis,maritime containershavelowerpalletcapacity,rangingfrom76%to82%utilization,whilethecapacityof

26

domesticcontainersrangesfrom9398%.ItisexpectedthattheshareofstackableILUs(swap bodies) in European IW shipping will increase. This may amplify a deficiency caused by incompatible standards, i.e. the current standardbeam container vessels have maximal externalbeamof11.45mandmaximalinternalholdwidthof10.10m,suchthatfourcontainer layersabreast,each2.50mwide(max),couldbestowed.ButthemajorityofpalletwideILUs are2.55mwidebecausepackingofpalletsinto2.50mouterwidthILUsissomewhatdifficult.A feasiblesolutiontothisshipholdsizevs.ILUsizeproblemcouldbemixedstowingofmaritime containers(2.44mwide)andILUs(2.55mwide).Also,increaseofstandardvesselbeamfrom 11.45 m to 11.65 m is possible but requires an acceptance of the recommended clearance between vessel and lock sides to be less than 0.3 m. European ILUs (EILU), which fulfil all requirementsforcompatibilitywithEuropallets,arestackableswapbodiesClassC745which are7.45x2.55x2.90m(longertypewouldbeupto45feetlong).Bytheway,presentlythe dominantEuropeanILUsareswapbodiesthatarenotstackable. Only the maritime containers (TEUs) are usually considered in IWT, although the most promising and dominant units in IWT in the next 20 or so years are expected to be both maritime ISO containers (for international deepsea/overseas trade) and stackable, pallet optimized long EILUs for intraEuropean trade see Current State of Standardisation and FutureStandardisationNeedsforIntermodalLoadingUnitsinEurope(www.cordis.europa.eu). 4.3. Thehinterland TheindustryandinfrastructuraldevelopmentoftheDanubehinterlandareoftenneglectedin thereviewofnewtransportprojects,suchas,forexample,modalshiftprojectsandintermodal transport.Furthermore,intermodaltransportpossibilitiesareoftencomparedtothoseonthe RhinealthoughthereisastrikingdifferencebetweentheRhineandtheDanubehinterland. TheRhinepassesthroughthemostdevelopedpartsoftheworld,whilethedevelopmentofthe Danubehinterlandvaries,butisgenerallybelowthatoftheRhine.ThehinterlandoftheUpper Danube(Germany,AustriaandpartlySlovakiaandHungary)isgenerallywelldeveloped,while thatoftheMiddleandLowerDanubeisnot.Thereare,however,somesimilaritiesbetweenthe RhinesPortofRotterdamandtheDanubesConstanta(namely,around1.5millioncontainers are presently transhipped through Constanta, with 36% increase in 2007 compared to 2006), but since the destination of this cargo is mostly for the area in the vicinity of Bucharest, the Danubeasawhole,isnotaswellutilizedanIWTresourceascouldbeexpected.Upgradesin the infrastructure are required for initialization of modal shift projects. This important fact is oftenforgotten,andprovenintermodalsolutionswhichworkonthepatternriverRhine aresometimessuggestedfortheDanube.Table4.1providesanoverviewofthecharacteristics ofthetworivers.

27

TheRoRoserviceontheDanubeisnotrequiredtobeexaminedhere;forfurtherinformation seetheMUTANDandCREATINGstudies.Itshouldbenoted,however,thatRoRoservicehas several advantages taking into account that the largest trade in the Danube corridor is conducted by road vehicles. Thus, while the market share in the EU15 allocated to the road transportisaround7075%(withunacceptable30%increaseduringthelasttenyears),inthe SEECitiscurrentlyabove90%;andincreasingintheshortterm.Therailwayinfrastructurein Austriaisalsoregardedtobeovercrowded.Consequently,seemsthatIWT,andparticularlythe DanubeIWT,istheonlyalternativemodewithenormoustransportpotentials,seeAppendix6. Table4.1AnoverviewoftheRhineandtheDanube The Rhine
Regulated river (ensured through many investments), guaranteed depths, often 3.5 m Developed hinterland and transport infrastructure 850 km navigable Developed logistics General knowledge about IWT potential does exist Awareness about EST exist Inland ports traffic: Rotterdam - 110 mill. t, Duisburg - 50 mill. t 84% & 34% of European selfpropeled and pushed barges fleet, respectively 56% tkm of EU15 IWT (IWT of EU27-EU15 accounts to only 5% tkm of EU27)

The Danube

Partially regulated river, shallow water on many sectors, occasionally 2.5 m Undeveloped hinterland and transport infrastructure Long river, 2400 km navigable Undeveloped logistics concepts Sufficient knowledge about potential of IWT does not exist Awareness about EST does not exist Inland ports traffic: Constanta 35 mill. t Regensburg - 2.5 mill. t 4% & 44% of European selfpropelled and pushed barges fleet, respectively

4.4.

Concludingremarks

ThereisadramaticdifferencebetweenseaandIWT: a) Seavesselshavenocompetition(withouttheminternationaltradeisimpossible) b) IWThasverystrongcompetitionfromalternatives(railwayandroadtransport) c) IWT is more constrained by natural physical conditions as rivers flow through the mainland. Consequently, the land transport modes dictate the cost of transport, but also the type of intermodal loading units that should be used. So, if standard ISO containers (TEU, FEU) work well on the sea, that does not yet mean they will be so competitive in IWT, i.e. IWT should adapt itself to other modes and hence standards that are broadly used in Europe, and in particular to palletwise domestic containers (EILUs) which are just 616 cm wider than the
28

usual sea containers. Nevertheless, this small difference of only few centimetres poses problemsinIWT,resultingofteninuncompetitivenesscomparedtolandtransportmodes. Efficient cargo handling (transhipment), not only in the ports/hubs but in the hinterland, is essential for successful intermodal transport. In other words, development of the hinterland, transport infrastructure, knowledge about IWT possibilities, EST, logistics etc. are decisive factorsforapplicationofintermodality.Theseexplainwhycontainerizationisacceptedonthe Rhine,whiletheRoRotechnologyseemstoworkbetterontheDanube. IWTofcontainersisinherentlyamoreefficientintermodalsolution(thanRoRo)duetotheir stackabilityandstowability.Nevertheless,giventhattheDanubeisnotfullyregulatedandthat ithasshallowsonseveralsectors,containervesselswithlowercarryingcapacity(thanonthe Rhine,forinstance)shouldbeconsideredasafeasiblesolution.Bargetrainswithpartlyloaded bargeswouldgivegoodresultstoo.Inanycase,asufficientnumberofcontainersisnecessary forsuccessfulIWT,andthatdependsverymuchonthedevelopmentoftheregionaleconomy alongtheDanubecorridor.

29

5. WATERBORNETRANSPORT[SPIN,26thDuisburgColloquium]
ThecoreofthisreportisgivenintheSection8wheretwotypicaldesignsconceptshipswill be developed. Concepts are usually based on previous research and successful vessels. Consequently,itwasdecidedthataSectiononstateoftheartshouldbeadded. 5.1. Stateoftheart 5.1.1. Selfpropelledvessel

ProbablythemostsuccessfulselfpropelledgeneralcargoandcontainervesselsontheDanube areoftheclassMGSSJochenstein(Figure5.1).TheseshipswerebuiltintheOsterreichische Schiffswerften AG in LinzKorneuberg more than 20 years ago for German (about 10 vessels) andSovietnowUkrainianshippingcompanies(about15vessels). The MGSS Jochenstein was a prototype for (probably the only) recentlybuilt selfpropelled vesselontheDanube(builtfortheJRBshippingcompany).Presumablyunusual,butJRBchose theoldDanubestandardforbreadth(11m),soasacontainervesselshewillbeabletocarry onlythreecontainersabreast(insteadoffourwithB=11.4m). Loa=95m Boa=11.4m(some11.0m) H=3.2m T=2.7m Highestfixedpoint6.5mabovebasisline Cargocapacity1960t PB=2x600kW(someofthem2x800kW) Bowthruster130kW.

Figure5.1GeneralArrangementofMGSSJochenstein OntheRhineRiver(seeFigures5.2to5.4)muchlargercontainershipsexist,forinstancethe motorshipoftheJOWIclassthatwerefollowedbytherecentlybuiltZembla(L=135.0m, B=17.4m,500TEU,3200kW).TheCraneBargeMercuriusAmsterdam(86x11.5m,144TEU, crane lift capacity 35t/30m, transhipment 18 TEU/h) is suitable for short haul container
30

transport and transh t hipment directly onto t quay (no need for port or hub should als be the o b) so mentione edas is the first river c container sh equipped with its ow transhipment equipment hip d wn (Figure5.5).

Fig gure5.2Ze emblaoneofthelarg gestcontaine ershipsont theRhine(So ource:INE)

re5.3Couplingtrainon ntheRhinew withatypica alcontainers shipof4x4x13=208TEU Us Figur

Figure e5.4Smallcontainerve esselAmerHopper8 86x7.03x2.86m(Sourc ce:Mercuriu us)


31

Figure5 5.5Craneb bargeMerc curiusAmste erdam(Source:Mercurius) Concerni ingselfpropelledbulkc carriers,the vesselSava aMala(96. .6x13.8x4 4.4m)isamo ongst thelarge estontheDa anube.Herc capacityis2 2600tofbul lkcargo;she ehasunique eequipment tthat enabless selfdischarg getothesho oreortheholdofanoth hervessel(th hesevessels saremainlyused forgrave elandsand transport). Toincreasecapacity,hightensiles steelwasus sedforcoam mings andgang gways,sothe evesselsare erelativelye elasticwithu unusuallylar rgesaggingo ofaround25 5cm. The cem ment carrier Sajkas (102 x 11.6 x 3.5 m) has a capacity of 1500 t. The vessel was x s y . l originally built wit 18 cylin y th ndrical cem mentholds a and special pneumati selfdisch ic harge equipme ent,butsoon nafterthel launching,a althoughinm manyrespectsaremarkablevessel l,she wasconv vertedintoo ordinarybulk kcarrier.Thereasonfor rthiswasthatadequate eshorecapacities for ceme accepta ent ance were never built! This emph ! hasises the importance of the ov e verall transport tchainandn notjustofth hewaterbor rnepart. The spec bulk ca cial argo ship M MercurialLa atistar (86 x 11.4 x 3.5 m) has s self loading and g unloadingequipmen ntfortranspo ortofflourb bulk(Figure5.6).Transp portofflourbythisparti icular shipandroute(intheRhinecorr ridor)reduce es10,000tra ailermovesayear. Tankers(crudeoil,p products,che emicalsetc.) )arealsopresentonIW WW.Onetyp picalRhineta anker 3 istheEinstein(Fig gure5.7)of 86x11.4x 3.2m,with h6tankstot talling2055t t/2093m ,w witha power in nstalled of 1080 kW. A large num 1 A mber of selfp propelled ta ankers and tank barges was s decommissioned on the Danub when the oil pipelin was built (this was a be e ne t actually the first e reason fo decline of IWT on th Danube in recent history; the s or o he second was the war and UN d sanctions sinexYugoslaviaovert thelastdeca ade).

32

Figur re5.6Flour rcarrierMe ercurialLatis star(Source e:Mercurius s)

Figure5.7Typicalselfprope elledtankerfromtheRh hineEinste ein(Source e:Mercurius) TherecentlybuiltF FuturaCarrie er(andher rthreesiste erships,Figu ure5.8)has innovatives semi anhullform mwithtwop propulsived devicesatth hebow(for minimumw wavemaking g),air catamara lubricatio (for redu on uced friction resistance) applied for the firs time to European in nal st nland waterway vessels (see Project S SMOOTH, Se ection 5.2.4.), modular design conc cept (see Fig gures 5.21 and 5.23) etc. Hull form is optimised f shallow water and o d H for offers good manoeuvra ability (with fou identical azimuthing units). Germ Federa Ministry for the Envir ur man al ronment, Na ature Conserva ationandNu uclearSafety ycofundedtheproject.However,a althoughthe eFuturaCarrier isaveryinterestingconcept,she eisactuallyariverseav vesselanda assuchcann notcompete ewith ssels (as som design c me compromise had to be made for sea sailing Conseque es r g). ently, river ves severalin nnovationst thatwereem mployedare enotasattractiveforth herivervess selsastheys seem atthefirstsight.

33

Figure5.8FuturaCarrier(Source:www.newlogistics.com) 5.1.2. BargeTrains

Pushboat technology was introduced on the Danube in 1961 (on the Rhine 1955) and was copiedfromtheMississippiRiver.Therearetwobargetraintypes:a)apushtrain(pushboat+ barges)and,b)acouplingtrain(motorship+barge).PossiblevesselformationsontheDanube aredepictedinFigure5.9.

Figure5.9Possiblevesselformations(Source:ManualonDanubeNavigation)

34

Thefirst pushboatsw wereKabla ar(Figure5.10)andKo osmaj(own nedbyJRB). .Soonafter that, thepush hboattechno ologywasin ntroducedin notherDanu ubecorridor rcountries; todaypushb boats dominate the Danub waterwa Relatively large barg convoys w e be ay. y ge were pushe (when oil was ed l transport ted, before the pipelin was built particularly on the Middle and Lower Dan ne t), d nube, consistingoftenof1 12DanubeIItypebarges.Itwasrec cordedthat morethan3 35,000tofc cargo waspush hedinoneco onvoy,seeF Figure5.11t to5.13.

Figure e5.10Thef firstnewlyb builtpushboatontheDa anubeKab blar;itisstillinoperatio on

Figure e5.11Oneo ofthelarges stconvoysontheDanub be(withtank kbarges)(So ource:Grubo or) Themain nadvantageofpushing vs.towingisthatlessp powerisnee ededforpus shing,which hmay beexplai inedthrough huseofsoc calledtrainf formationco oefficientcT.Namely,cT=RT/Ri,w c where RT is tota resistance of barge t al e train and Ri is individua resistance of each ba al e arge in a pu ushed

35

formation. So, cT is always less than one and is betwe 0.65 and 0.85 (lowe values ar for een d er re slenderb bargetrainc configurations)andisar round0.75f foratypical couplingtra ain.cTforto owing configura ationsisab bithigher,orinotherw words,witht thesamepo owerpushin ngspeedisu upto 10%high herthanthe etowingspe eed.Moreov ver,steering goftowed bargeswas oftenneces ssary, requiring gextramanp poweronboa ard. Neverthe eless,althou ughsomewhatobsolete, ,thetowing gtechnology ywasneverq quiteabandoned ontheDanube.Tow wingtechnolo ogyhassom meadvantage es,particula arlyduringd dryseasonsw when er owing tugs have much smaller d h draught than contempo orary the wate level is low, as to pushboat ts.Furtherm more,thetow wingtechno ologymaybe eapplicableonthesea,whereaspushing isnotpossibledueto owavesize.

Figure5. .12Pushing gtrainconsis stingof6EuropeIIbarge esabout19 90x34.2m,u upto16,000 0tdw depending gonthedrau ught(Source e:CREATING GWP5)

Figure5.13Pushingtra ainconsisting gof9EuropeIIbarges(about260x34.2m)


36

PossibleformationsalongtheDanubecorridoraredepictedinFigure5.9,whileTable5.1. showsECEclassificationofEuropeaninlandwaterways. Table5.1ECEclassificationofEuropeaninlandwaterways,vesselsandpushedconvoys (Source:ManualonDanubeNavigation)

5.1.3. Barges By far the largest majority of Danube barges have breath of 11 m, while some are made according to the Rhine standards and have breadth of 11.4 m (see Sections 4.2 and 2.4 Implications on ship design). In addition, many barges are 9.5 m wide, not to mention old towingvesselsoccasionallyusedinpushedtrains.Usually,butnotnecessarily,Danubebarges
37

have dra aught of up to 2.5 m a height of 2.7 m, w and while barges for the Rhine are de eeper (draughtofupto3.9 95mandhei ight(depth) ofupto4m m),seeTable e5.2. Table5.2 2Mostcommonriverbarges(Sourc ce:CREATING GWP5)

Danubes seabargesa are38.25m mlong,sothattwocoup pledbarges correspond toonestan ndard Danube (river) barg of 76.5 m (other characterist ge tics are B=11 m, H=3.9 m, T=3.3 m, ondingtodw wt=1070twithalightsh hipweightof f240t).Nev vertheless,t therearese everal correspo otherbargetypesalo ongtheDanubecorridor,e.g.seeFigure5.14.

re5.14SBbargeswitha acapacityof f80TEUusedforthecon ntainertransportonthe e Figur route eBelgradeC Constanta.Pr resently,thisistheonlyavailableco ontainerserv viceonthe Danu ube(Source:NordMarin ne) 5.1.4. Pushboats Long ran and har nge rbour pushb boats were built on the Danube a most of them had two and d propeller but large pushboats with thre propeller were not rare. Besid the dra rs, ee rs t des aught restrictio Danube pushboats generally di on, iffer from those on the Rhine as they have more e

38

accommo odationspace;Danube pushboatsh havelargerc crewsthatw workinshift ts,astheDanube isamuch hlongerrive erthantheR Rhine,i.e.mo oretimeisspentsailing. During th 1970s, af he fter some e experience w gained, a kind of st was tandard or r recommendation emerged dinEasternB Blocshippingcompaniesconcerning glongrange eDanubepu ushboats.Be esides thestand dardisedmo ooringequip pment,ships shavearoun nd2x1200 HP(2x880 kW),aleng gthof around 3 m, a brea 35 adth of 11 m (like Danu barges) and draugh of less th 1.9 m. T m ube ht han These pushboat tswerebuilt tinseriesinallDanubecountriesdo ownstreamo ofAustria. Worthm mentioningarealsothela argestpushb boatsonthe eDanube Karadjordje eandKarlo ovac builtin ntheshipyar rdTito(no owBelgrad de)forJRB (seeFigure 5.15).Oneo ofthepushb boats was equ uipped with a special system (de evice) for rudder unloading. The reason for this r innovatio wasthat (floating)lo on ogswereoft tenwedged thenozz and/or mainorflan din zles nking rudders, which sometimes bloc cked or dam maged the r rudders. So, the purpos of the ru se udder unloadingdevicewa astopermit therestoft therudders (thosewhic chwerenot blockedby logs) to execu their fun ute nction. Altho ough the pu urpose of th invention sounds log his n gical, due to the o poorlyde eveloped mechanism (prototype) and the need for f m frequent int terventions, the , unloadingdevicewa assoonrepla acedwithth heusualsystemofconn nectingrods s.Anotherre ecent uctionwasm madetoena ableonlytw wopropellers/enginesto obeoperati ional(them middle reconstru shaftlinewasremove ed).

Figu 5.15 G ure General arra angement pl of lan Kar radjordje, t largest p the pushboats o the on Danube Loa= =40.45m,B= =13.0m,H=2.8m, T=1. .952.15m,PB=3x129 94kW, V=14 4km/hwith h12barges1 1700tdweach

39

Although not a push h hboat, due to its uniqu electric p ue propulsion, a Austrian river icebre an eaker RoethelsteinwithAzipodprop pulsorsshouldbementio oned(seeFi igure5.16).Duringtrials s,the Roethelsteinprove editscapabi ilityofpenetrating4mthickiceridgesandbreaking0.7mlevel espeedof1 1.52km/h.T Thehullformfollowscu urrentthink kingforvery yshallowdra aught iceatthe icebreake erswithacylindricalbo ow,parallel midbodyandanunderflowstern feedingwat terto the pode azimuth propulsion units. Roe ed ethelstein is an intere esting vesse because o its el of propulsio onsystem,i. .e.theapplic cationofthe eAzipodprin nciplewithlowpowerd demands.

Loa=42.3 3m BMAX=10. .3m H=3.35m m Airdraugh ht=6.05m T=2m(c canoperatew with1.6m) Bollardpu ull=125kN Speed=2 20km/h Mainengines=2x700 0kW/1500rp pm Rudderpr ropeller2x560kW/550rp pm

Figure5 5.16Riveric cebreaker Roethelstein n(Source:S Ship&BoatInt.)

Pushboat from oth European rivers mig also be of interest for this stu ts her ght udy, for inst tance those of Elbe clas (Figure 5. ss .17) their draught is only 0.85 m Other ch m! haracteristics are L=28.6m m,B=10.3m,highestfixe edpoint4.25 5m,W=166t,P=2x220k kW.

Fig gure5.17P PushboatofElbeclass(Source:De eutschenBinn nenreedereiH HoldingAG)

40

5.2.

Conceptsofresearchedinlandvesselsforcargotransport

Several research and development projects have been carried out on inland vessels. Most of theseprojectswerebasedoncontemporarytechnologyandonlysomeparticularaspectswere researched.Forinstance,intheCREATINGprojectthemaininvestigationwasdirectedtowards environmental aspects that would still be economically acceptable for shipowners. In the INBISHIP project, electric propulsion was specially investigated. In the INBAT and VEBIS projects,extremelyshallowwatervesselswereinvestigated,andintheMUTANDprojectjust RoRo service for the Danube was treated. Some of the projects are important for this study andwillbementionedhere. 5.2.1. SelfpropelledvesselINBISHIP INBISHIP (Common European Inland Vessel Concept) is an innovative approach to inland ship designpoweredbyadieselelectricsystemwithapodpropulsionsystem,optimumhulllinesin terms of resistance, excellent manoeuvrability and increased economical efficiency in inland shippingoperations(seeFigures5.18,7.12and7.13).Amongstthenoveltiesisthattheengine roomcanbeplacedanywhereintheship(evenatthebowifnecessary)asthereisnodirect couplingofenginesandpropellers.Asaconsequencethemachineryrequireslessspacedueto theadopteddieselelectricpowersystem,hencecargospacemaybeincreased(inparticular, ona110x11.4mshiponecontainerlayermorecanbeloaded!).Thistypeofshipdesignleads tolowerfuelconsumption,emissionlevelsandmaintenancecosts.

Figure5.18INBISHIPconcept 5.2.2. PushboatsandbargesforextremelyshallowwaterVEBISandINBATprojects Overlongerperiods,theElbeandOdraRiversallowshipdraughtsof1.01.4monly.Withthe reunificationofGermany,theR&DprojectVEBIS(acronymforimprovementoftheefficiencyof inland water transportation) was initiated. The goal was twofold: a) to increase transport
41

capacity on existing waterways, and b) to enable effective operation at larger draughts. So, amongst others, pushboats with a draught between 0.8 and 1.7 m with pumpjets and propellersweredeveloped(linesofshallowdraughtpushboatsandofselfpropelledvesselsare showninFigures5.19and7.3,respectively). AnEUprojectundertheacronymINBAT(INnovativeBArgeTrain)wasinitiatedaftertheVEBIS project with a similar goal, i.e. development of barge train that will operate efficiently at draughtsrangingfrom0.6to1.7m(seeFigure5.20).WithinINBAT,amongstothers,application ofnewlightweightconstructionmaterialsandstructuraldesignswereinvestigated(seeFigure 7.7). Modular pushboat designs (Figure 5.21) and new propulsion concepts were also investigated.

Figure5.19VEBISPushboatwithapropellerof1.2minnozzle

Figure5.20INBATTargets(Source:Guisnetetal.2004)
42

Fig gure5.21Pushboatmodules(Sourc ce:Guisnete etal.2004) The shal llow draugh pushboat developed for the IN ht t d NBAT projec has a ret ct tractable m middle rudderp propeller (in order to en nhance man noeuvrability and to red y duce resistance when n in not use) tog gether with two classic horizont cal tally driven shaft propellers (Figure 5.22). During operation in very sh hallow wate only side propellers are suppos to be u er, e sed used (the ce entral r ed), while in deeper waters the ce n entral prope eller would be used to to oo propeller is retracte increasethebargetr rainspeed.

Fig gure5.22Th hePushboat tpropulsionarrangementdevelopedwithinINB BATproject (Guesn netetal.200 04) 5.2.3. Someoth herprojectss similartotheINBATand dINBISHIPprojects arvesselwa asbuiltinSe erbia/Yugoslavia,seeFig gure5.23;th hisvesselwa asnamedMMPO Amodula (Modular rMultiPurp poseVessel 13.75x7.6 6x2.4m)an ndconsistedofapropuls sivemodule ewith a driving complex, connecting modules ( g g (pallets) wh hich provide stiffness, accommodation e modulesandawhee elhousemod dule.

43

Fig gure5.23M ModularMultiPurposeV VesselMM MPO(Source:ShipyardBelgrade)

Similar to the INBAT propulsion concept, the so calle hybrid pushboat ( ed (Bilen and Z Zerjal 1998), h one larg central propeller of 1.85 m w has ge f with a conv ventional sh haftline and two azimuthing and ret tractable hy ydrostatic side propellers of 1.35 m. The p 5 proposed hybrid t d see 5.24. The fir one is connected to the rst o pushboat has two diesel engines in line, s Figure 5 central, mechanicallydriven pro opeller, while the seco engine drives two hydrostatic side ond propulso orsviahydra aulictransmissionsystem m(thusenablingindepe endentand flexiblecon ntrol). So,load distributionbetweence entralands sidepropelle ersisoptimi ised.Thema ainadvantageof ngementist thepossibilitytodrawn nominalpow werforapar rticularconv voyalsoena abling thisarran good ma anoeuvring characteristics. This is s c similar to th INBISHIP propulsion concept, as the he hydraulic transmissio is equiva c on alent to elec ctric transmission (however, the se econd has higher efficiency y).
Lo oa=24.2m B=11.4m H=2.8m T=1.9m Dieseleng.of2x600kW/1 1800rpm Nominalprope ellerpower960kW

Figure5.24Hybridp pushboatp project (Source:BilenandZe erjal1998)

44

5.2.4. Conceptsofadvancedvessels Nevertheless, some researched projects carried out concern advanced vessels whose time, seems,didnotcomeyetduetovariousreasons.Besidenecessarycostsforthedevelopmentof a new concept, one of the reasons is that innovations are not so easily accepted by the traditionally conservative inland shipping society, which accepts proven, durable and safe products.Inthatrespect,notethattheaverageageoftheRhineandDanubevesselsisaround 50and30years,respectively(seeAppendix6). Someoftheconceptsofresearchedadvancedvesselsthatnevercametobeare: PASCAT (Partial Air cushion Supported CATamaran) a catamaran vessel with hovercraft/SES capabilities that has advantages at relatively higher speeds, but still requiresverylargepowertobeinstalledcomparedtocontemporaryshipsFigure5.25. PELS (Project Energysaving Airlubricated Ships) followed by SMOOTH project (Sustainable Methods for Optimal design and Operation of ships with air lubricaTed Hulls) the aim was to reduce frictional resistance of flatbottomed vessels (likeriver vessels) for around 20% by pumping air under the bottom. Recent fullscale trials on 83 m air cavity system (ACS) seagoing ship ACS Demonstrator, which was 1:4 scale model of a very large crude oil carrier, revealed fuel savings (hence CO2 too) of up to 15%Figure5.26. A ship with movable buoyancy bodies (width increases from 9 m to 12.6 m) suited particularly to operate on shallow water; bodies move by hydraulic cylinders enabling draughtreductionwithoutreducingthecargoquantityFigure5.27.

Figure5.25PASCATconceptFigure5.26Theprincipleofaircavity system(Source:TheNavalArchitect)

45

Figure5.27Crosssectionofinlandshipespeciallysuitable tooperateonshallowwater(Source:SPINRhine) 5.3. Concludingremarks

Existingtypesofshipsandavailablenewtechnologieswerereviewedtohelpcreateadesignfor ashallowdraughtDanubeship(seeSection8). Partlyloadedbargescanbethesimplestandcheapestanswertorestricteddraughtproblems, taking into account that power needed to push an additional barge (or few of them) rises slightly,whilecargovolumecanincreaserapidly.Ifthisisthecase,theproblemusuallyposes thedraughtofapushboatwhichcannotbereduced.So,ashallowdraughtpushboatwouldbe advantageousinthesesituations. Ontheotherhand,selfpropelledvesselsarefasterandthereforemoresuitableforcontainer transport(whichhastocompetewithlandtransportmodes,i.e.railwayandtruck). Bargesarebyfarthebestfortransportoflargequantitiesofrelativelycheapcargo,likebulk cargo(coal,ore,gravel,sand,grainetc.).Forliquidcargo(oilandpetroleumproducts)bothship typesbargetrainsandselfpropelledvesselsareused. Concerning researched inland vessels, of particular interest for this study are the INBISHIP, VEBISandINBATprojects.Someinterestingaspectsoftheseprojectswillbementionedinthe followingsections. Themainreasonwhytheinnovativeshiptypesarenotappliedonabroaderscaleiseconomics. Namely,asalreadymentioned,reducedloading(resultinginlowerdraughtnavigation)seems to be the cheapest solution to adapt to dry seasons and shallow water. Consequently, state subsidiesshouldprobablybeconsideredasnecessarytogivenewdesignsanychancetoenter themarket.

46

6. CHARACTERISTICSOFSELFPROPELLEDCONTAINERVESSELSADAPTEDTO THEDANUBEWATERWAY[COVEDA,SPIN]
The problems connected to the design, construction, hydrodynamics, stability, etc. of inland container vessels are very different from those of sea going ships. Already mentioned restrictionsindraughtconnectedtowaterwaydepth,restrictionsinairdraughtconnectedto theheightofbridges,andrestrictionsinbeamandlengthconnectedtothesizeoflocksmake numerous and serious challenges to the designer. A good inland container vessel therefore, differssignificantlynotonlyfromaseagoingship,butalsofromonewaterwaytoanother.An optimalDanubecontainervesselwouldcertainlynotbethesameastheoptimalvesselforthe Rhineorsomeotherwaterway.

6.1. Maximalvesseldimensions As expected, the number of transported containers (which influences transport efficiency) depends on vessel length, beam and draught. A reasonable number of carried containers on IWWcanvaryfromthreetosixabreast.So,properbeamofDanubecontainervesselsshould changediscontinuouslyinthefollowingmanner: B 9m,for3containersabreast B= 11.4m,for4containersabreast B 14m,for5containersabreast B 16.5m,for6containersabreast Inthecaseoffourcontainersabreast,thebeamshouldnotexceed11.4m(max.11.45m)so the vessel can pass through the 12 m locks on the Upper Danube. Consequently, 11.4 m becameadefactostandard,althoughthisbreadthislesssignificantfortheMiddleandLower Danube,wherevesselbeamispracticallyunlimitedbythelocks. TherelationshipbetweennumberofTEUcontainersandvesselmaindimensionsisdepictedin Figure 6.1. With these diagrams, the choice of vessel length and beam is straight forward, exceptfortheregionswherethelinesoverlap.Intheseoverlappingregions,thedesignerhasto decide between two vessel concepts with different L/B ratios. This decision depends on numerousstability,resistance,propulsionandstrengthconsiderations. The average mass of containers changes randomly from trip to trip. However, the longterm, averagevalueforastandard20footcontainer(TEU)canbeassumedtobearound13t.This massiscalledtherequiredcontainermass.Nevertheless,averageavailablecontainermass(mc)
47

forinlandvesselsislimitedandisindirectcorrelationtoitsrestricteddraughtTandnumberof containerlayers(nH),whiletheotherparametersareofsecondaryimportance.Onlyacertain combination of T and nH imply a wellbalanced vessel having, for instance, mc 13 t. Consequently,designofawellbalancedinlandshallowdraughtcontainervesselisnoteasy.
150 140 130 120 110 5 Containers Abreast 100 L/B = 7 - 12 90 80 70 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 4 Containers Abreast
90 80 100 4 Containers Abreast L/B = 7 - 12 3 Containers Abreast 70 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 150

L (m)

2 Container Layers
140 130

L (m)

3 Container Layers

6 Containers Abreast

6 Containers Abreast 120 110 5 Containers Abreast

3 Containers Abreast

n
400

Figure6.1RelationofvessellengthtonumberofTEUcontainers

One method of increasing the available container mass without decreasing the number of containers or increasing draught is to reduce the lightship weight. This is usually too expensive (as new technologies and new materials should be applied). It is also possible to increasethevesselbreadth,withoutincreasingthenumberofcontainersabreast.Forexample, forfourcontainersabreast,vesselbeamcouldbe1213m,ratherthan11.4m. Thedraughtsthatwouldgivetherequiredcontainermassof13tarepresentedinFigure6.2. So,draughtshouldbebetween33.25mforthefourlayervesselsusualontheRhine.Three layervesselswithdraughts(T)between2.252.5mandtwolayervesselswithT=1.61.85m are acceptable for the Danube. Nevertheless, the choice of draught is influenced not only by thestatisticsofwaterwaydepth,butalsobyavailablecargoandothertransportation,financial reasons,technicalcharacteristicsofthevessel,etc. Air draught might also be critical, since minimal air clearance (above high water level when passing bellow bridges) is 5.25 m and 7.00 m for two and three container layers respectively (seeTable2.2bridgeheights).Sometimesthiscouldbeovercomebyballastingtheship,but thisincreasestransportcosts. Consequently,duetowaterandairdraughtrestrictions,waterbornetransportofcontainerson the Danube is less efficient than on the Rhine. On the Danube, a vessel of the same size can transportonetotwocontainerlayerslessthanontheRhine!

48

17

m c (t)
15 13
4 Layers 3 Layers 2 Layers Required mass

11

Two Layers

Three Layers

Four Layers

T (m)
3.5 4

5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

6.2.

Figure6.2Draughtsfortwo,threeandfourlayercontainervessels Transporteconomy

Containervesselsshouldhavefullform(duetodraughtrestrictions),buttheL/Bratio(longor beamy vessel) has yet to be clarified. In that respect, the transport economy from a hydrodynamic point of view, or the coefficient of container transport efficiency (CC), was introduced.So,
CC = n v no . containers km / h PB kW

shows that adding a container layer, or removing a row of containers abreast, dramatically increasesefficiency.Thelargecontainervesselswith5or6containersabreastneverreachthe efficiency of less beamy vessels. Also, smaller vessels, in this sense, are found to be advantageous. ThechoicebetweenaLongandBeamyvessel(overlappingofcurvesinFigure6.1)isactuallya choice between L/B=1012 or L/B=79 (having the same draught). Longer vessels are advantageous from the waveresistance point of view, while beamy vessels are better in stability (which is satisfied in all cases) and hullweight considerations. Therefore, the compromiseshouldbemadebetweenresistanceandweightconsiderations. Reduction in hull weight is significant for inland container vessels because of their limited draught.Aroughanalysis(forthreecontainerlayers)indicatesthatthereductionofhullweight bychoosingabeamyinsteadofalongvesselisapproximately1015%.Thisallowsanincrease ofavailablecontainermassofapproximately510%. ThewaveresistanceinshallowwaterdependsmainlyonparametersL/handL/B,andbothof theseparametersdecreaseifabeamyvesselischoseninsteadofthelongone.Thereductionof L/hwouldbebeneficialifresistanceisinfluencedbythewaterwaybed,whichisthecasefor
49

high,nearcriticalspeedsonly,i.e.highFNh(seeFigures3.2to3.4).However,usualspeedsof thefastestselfpropelledvesselscorrespondtomuchlowerFNhvalues,certainlybelowFNh=0.65. Consequently, resistance is influenced mainly by the change of the parameter L/B. Wave resistancesignificantlydecreasesbychoosingalonginsteadofbeamyvessel.Forinstance,by choosingthelongership,thecoefficientofcontainertransportefficiencyCCcouldincreaseup to 20% (see Figure 6.3), which is large enough to compensate the opposing increase of hull weight. The trends on the Rhine seem to be in favour of this approach, as they show the tendencytowardsthevesselshavingL/B>11. Concerning selfpropelled container vessels for Danube tributaries (e.g. Sava, Tisza), it follows fromthepreviousdiscussionand Table2.3,thatsmallervesselsofB 9m(threecontainers abreast)withtwocontainerlayers(sometimesthree)wouldbeadequate.Consequently,ifthe vesselslengthis80m(allowedbyECEclassIV,seeTable5.1)thanaccordingtoFigure6.1,the carryingcapacitywouldbearound50to75TEUcontainers,fortwoandthreecontainerlayers respectively.
1

C c (no.containerskm/h/kW)
0.8

2 Container Layers
0.8

C c (no.containerskm/h/kW)

3 Container Layers
B =11.4 m

L/B = 7 - 12
0.6

0.6

B=9m

B = 14 m B = 16.5 m

B =11.4 m
0.4

B=9m

B = 14 m B = 16.5 m

0.4

0.2

L/B = 7 - 12
0.2

v = 15 km/h
0 70 80 90 100 110 120 130

L (m)
0
140

v = 15 km/h

L (m)
90 100 110 120 130 140

70

80

Figure6.3CoefficientofcontainertransportefficiencyCCfordifferentLandB. 6.3. Hydrodynamicanalysis

Allcommercialrivervessels,includingcontainervesselssailatsubcriticalspeeds(seeSection3) belowthehighresistanceregion,i.e.usuallyattheeconomicspeed(Vec)whichfollowsfrom Fnh0.650.70 (see Figure 6.4). So, for a river depth of 5 m, the economic speed would be around1617km/h,whilefordepthofonly2mitwouldbereducedtoonly1011km/h.Within thesubcriticalregionitcanbeshown(COVEDAstudy)thatslowervesselshavehighertransport efficiency.Note,howeverthatthecostofspeedandthebenefitsoftheincreasednumberof voyageswasnotincludedintheabovementionedCccoefficient.

50

35 30 25

v (km/h)

v cr
20 15 10 5

v ec

h (m)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Figure6.4Economicandcriticalspeeds The influence of propeller diameter on transport efficiency (Figure 6.5) also gives an unexpected result. Although efficiency increases with the increase of propeller diameter, the influence is relatively small. Taking into account all the risks connected with large propeller diameters, it follows that somewhat smaller propellers could often be advantageous. This conclusionisconsideredinmoredetailbyanalysingthepropulsiveefficiencyD.Theresultsare presented in 3D and 2D diagrams below (Figures 6.6 and 6.7), also showing the minimal diameter due to the cavitation criteria. The abovementioned considerations are based on a propeller in a nozzle; if naked propellers would be used it might be expected that the propulsiveefficiencyDwouldbearound5%less. It should be noted that in contrast to the draught (which could be reduced by smaller cargo weight),oncechosen,thepropellerdiametercannotbechanged.Itfollows,logically,thatthe propeller should be designed according to the minimal draught requirements. Such choice implies,however,apossiblereductionofitsefficiency.
1

D
C c (no.containerskm/h/kW)
0.60

0.8

4 Container Layers
0.6

0.55

(Dp)min

3 Container Layers
0.4

0.50

2 Container Layers
0.2

0.45

D p (m)
1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

0.8

16 17

0.8

v (km 15 /h)

14

(m )

(D p ) min

12

ation Cavit
13

1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0

Figure6.5Coeff.ofcontainertransport efficiencyfordifferentpropellerdiameters

Figure 6.6 Propulsiveefficiency asafunctionofspeedandDp

51

0.6

D
D p = 1.7 m D p = 1.5 m D p = 1.3 m D p = 1.1 m

0.55

0.5

D p = 0.9 m (D p ) min

0.45

D p = 0.7 m

v (km/h)
0.4

Figure6.7PropulsiveefficiencyDasafunctionofspeedandpropellerdiameter
11 12 13 14 15 16 17

6.4.

Hullweightconsiderations

It is essential to correctly assess the mass of lightship in very early stages of ship design, not only to obtain the right displacement, deadweight or draft, but also to analyse the available averagecontainermassandverifyifalimiteddraughtvesselcouldbewellbalanced.Thiscan beassessedfromthediagramshowninFigure6.8(Heuser1986)whichpresentslightshipmass forthesteelonly(withoutmachineryandequipment)ofRhinecommercialvesselsasafunction ofvesselcubicmoduleLBH.Thisdatawasenrichedwithfewavailableresults,presentedby the dots in the diagram. Note that some other sources gave smaller weight than shown in Figure6.8,althoughthecurvestrendisthesame.
1200

m lig (t)
1000

800

Hauser 1986
600

Measured

400

200

LBH (m )
0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000

Figure6.8Lightshipmass(steelonly)ofselfpropelledvessels (onabscissagivenisacubicmodule,i.e.LxBxHm3)

6.5.

Concludingremarks

Summarising,someunexpectedresultswereobtainedbyanalysingvesselcharacteristics,such as propeller diameter, propulsive efficiency, container transport efficiency etc. It is however, still discussable whether long and narrow vessels (that have smaller resistance) are
52

advantageousoverlarge,beamyones(whicharecomparativelylighterandthereforecheaper). Conclusionsregardingshipdimensionsarebasedontheassumptionsmentionedabove;other parameters of transport efficiencies (e.g. transport costs) could give different answers (resulting, for instance, in vessels of the Jowi class, see Figure 5.2). A very important conclusion,however,isthatprofitinthefirstplacedependsonnumberofcontainersonboard, andthatallotherfactorsarebyfarlessimportant. The relatively insignificant influence of screw diameter on overall efficiency indicates the advantagesofsomewhatsmallerpropellers.Actually,thismeansthatsplittingthetotalpower to more propellers, but of a smaller diameter, can enable navigation in shallow water. Nevertheless,thiswilldefinitelyincreasetheinvestment(shipbuilding)costs. On the Lower Danube attention should be paid to the restrictions of low water draught and high air draught (which is not the case on other Danube stretches), so one might come to a wrongideatoloadlargerthantheallowednumberofcontainersonboard. In any case, conclusions derived in the COVEDA study, which are partly presented in this section,areuseful.Aroughalgorithmforestimatingthevesselsmaindimensionsisdepictedin Figure6.9.
Input


Determinationof Choiceof

Numberofcontainers andthetransportation route

Numberofcontainer layersnH=2,3,4??


Choiceof

LandBforgivenn fromFig.6.1L,B=??


Determinationof

T=??

H=??

L/35T+F

Figure6.9Analgorithmforestimatingvesselmaindimensions

53

7. TECHNICAL MEASURES THAT MAKE INLAND SHIPS CLEANER AND MORE EFFICIENT[SPIN,RoRo2008,CREATING]
Generallyspeaking,environmentallysustainableandcheapIWTispossibleif: a) Contemporarylogisticconceptsareapplied b) Transhipmentisefficient c) Waterbornetransportisefficient Issue c) can be achieved by reduction of investment costs (application of design for manufacture techniques, for instance), reduction of maintenance costs, reduction of crew members (costs) and reduction of fuel costs. Note, however, that only few of the above mentionedareactuallytechnicalissues! Thelastissuereductionoffuelcostsdepends,amongstothers,onthefuelefficiencyofship; thisispurelyatechnicalmeasurethatwillbediscussedinthissectionaccordingtothescheme showninFigure7.1(theformulaegivenatthebottomwaspreviouslyexplainedinSection3). Namely,themaintechnicalmeasurestoenablebuildingofamoreefficientship,hencecleaner andthereforemoreenvironmentallyfriendly,aredividedintofourmaingroups.Eachgroupis furtherdividedintosubgroupsandwillbediscussedseparately.Energysaving(fuelefficiency) of waterborne transportation is the main goal here, but attention should always be paid to safety,aswellastoreductionofoveralldirectandindirectcosts.


Figure7.1Measuresthatleadtofuelefficiency

54

Environm mentallyand decologically yfriendlysh hipdoesnotonlymean moreefficie entship,but talso less pollu utant ship. Prevention o pollution by inland v P of vessels is generally regu ulated by va arious internationalandnat tionalrules(seeUNECE EResolutionNo.21,forinstance).As saconseque ence, have to be equipped w with approp priate techni ical means for collectio retentio on on, on vessels h board an transfer into reception facilities (shore base and float nd i ed ting) of was generate on ste ed board.Appendix4in ndicatesposs sibleshippo ollutants. 7.1. Improvem mentsinHul llResistance e(withthea aimtoreduc T) ceR

7.1.1. Shipform m As alread stated in Section 3, vessel spe and length should be adapted to a parti dy n , eed d icular waterway(waterde epthseeFigures3.2to o3.4).Thes secondaryhullformpar rameters,m mainly the form of the bo and stern, significan influenc resistance (see some shallow w m ow ntly ce water designs Figures7.3to7.5).Itsh houldbesta ated,however,thatago ood,lowresistancehullform canbeobtainedonly yifadviceo ofexpertsar refollowed, andoftena aftermodel experiment tsare carriedo outinspecializedtowing gtanks(whic chisnotdon nesooften),seeFigure7 7.2.Asaresultof experime entation, contemporary inland vess can hav lower res y sels ve sistance, in s some cases even upto50% %,thanthos seoffewdec cadesago(Z Zoelner2003 3). Contemp porary Comp putational F Fluid Dynam (CFD) te mics echniques m be used as an effi may d icient tool fo resistance reduction, see Figure 7.2. CFD te or e echniques, however, are also developed e withinsc cientificand researchins stitutionsan ndarenot(y yet)applied intheevery ydayengineering practice,soexpertad dviceisagainnecessary.

Figure7.2Modeltestsofapushtrain anexample eofgoodwa avesystemo optimisedby y Contem mporaryCom mputationalFluidDynam mics(CFD)(S Source:MAR RIN) ontext,ther resultsofot therrelated projects,fo orinstancet theVEBISPr roject(Zibelland Inthisco Mueller 1996) and Inland ship of the future (VBD report 126 are very useful. In both p 60) y nits/hull form for varia ms able transpo tasks an regimes o operation are ort nd of n projects, optimal un
55

investiga ated.Hintsa andrecomm mendationsf forthedesig gnofinland shipsforsh hallowwatercan be applie to vesse for the D ed els Danube wat terway; see Figures 7.3 and 7.4. (small and large e 3 selfprope elledvessels s)and5.19(pushboat).

Figure7. .3Twinscre ewship(VEB BISStudy:Ty ypeIandfro omitdevelopedTypeIV)L=82m,B B=9.5 m,T=2 2.5m,TEU77,propellersinnozzleswithconven ntionalrudde ers

Inlands shipofthefu uture, VBD DReport126 60

Figur re7.4Exam mpleoftheshiplinesdes sign(Source e:SPINRhine e)

Fi igure7.5Sp pecialattent tionshouldbepaidtotu unneland sk kirtdesignto oenablebet tterwaterin nflowtothepropeller


56

7.1.2. Shipweightreduction Lowspeedinlandvesselsaremadeexclusivelyofsteelandareverydurablesincetheirlifeis usually 50 years, often more. Hull construction of contemporary transport vessels does not differ much from those of few decades ago; hence their weight has not changed much. Possibilitiestointroduceoutoftheordinarymaterialstargetedathullweightreductionare low.Thesuperstructure,forinstance,couldbebuiltofaluminiumorSPS(seebelow),orhigh tensilesteelcouldbeusedforhullstructure(seeSection5.1.1,selfpropelledbulkcarrierSava Mala),butreductionofoverallweightwouldberelativelynegligible. Forinstance,GLRulesthatareoftenusedfordimensioninglargeselfpropelledinlandvessels pose a restriction that the ratio L/H should be less than 35 (if not, direct calculations are necessary). This actually stems from the Rhine vessels which, having larger draught than Danubevessels,alsohavealargersideheight(H).L/HratiosforlargeDanubevessels,however, mightbelargerthan40,sodirectlongitudinalstrengthcalculationshavetobeperformed. The socalled Sandwich Plate System (SPS) seems to be able to replace the traditional steel platewithsecondarystiffeners.SPSconsistsoftwoplateswithanelastomerinjectedbetween toformasolidunit(seeFigure7.6).ThescantlingsofSPSplatingaregenerallyintherangeof 3mm to 8mm for steel face plates, and 15mm to 50mm for core thickness. Till recently scantlings could be determined only by direct calculations, however in 2006 Lloyds Register revealed Provisional Rules for the Application of Sandwich Panel Construction to Ship StructureseeAppendix5.

Figure7.6SPSvs.conventionalstructure(Source:www.iesps.com) In the already mentioned INBAT project, a structural weight savings of around 40% was reported(Jastrzebski1993)ifsteelsandwichpanels(IcoreR)wouldbeusedforasmallbargeof 32.5m(seeFigure7.7).ItisstatedthatuseofIcoreRpanelssimplifiesbargeproductionaswell

57

as maint tenance (note that the IcoreR panel is somew what different than the SPS analysed in Appendix x5).Otherp projectsinw whichvarious skindsofSP PSwereinve estigatedare e:DELIGHT,LASS andCam mpoCaNord( (selfpropelle edbargeof6 65x5.8x3m weighing75tinstead dof170t,w witha lifetimeo of50yearsa andhullthicknessupto30cminsteadof8mm) ).

Figur re7.7Typic calframecro osssectiono ofanIcoreRpanelbarge e(Source:IN NBATProject t)

As the a abovementioned savin of 40% appear att ngs tractive, and keeping i mind tha LR d in at Provision Rules we recently published, custom calc nal ere culations we performed especiall for ere ly thisstudy y(seeAppendix5)onth heapplicatio onofanSPS Sconstructio onforatypic calDanubeb barge (77x11x2 2.8m,Figure e7.8).Accordingtothe eobtainedr results,awe eightsavings supto10% %may onlybee expected.Itwasalsofou und,howeve er,thatthep possibilityfo orweightsavingsshould dfirst beexaminedforcon nventionalsteelconstru uction,asin practiceIW WWbargesa aremuchhe eavier eClassificatio onSocietiesRules. thanrequiredbythe

Figure e7.8Crosssectionofc conventional llystructuredandinnovativeSPSco ontainerbarg ge Neverthe eless,SPSco onstructionm mayhaveso omeotheradvantages(besidesjust tweightsavings), e.g.chea aperproduct tionandadd ditionalsafe ety.Forinsta ance,theinn nerskinofa anIWWchemical tanker in nner plate could be bui of stainle steel and the outer plate of conventional s ilt ess d steel, usingonl ly50%ofthe eexpensivestainlessste eelincurren ntdesigns.

58

7.2.

InnovationsinPropulsionandTransmissions(withtheaimtoincreaseDS)

Propulsorsthatcanbeusedoninlandwaterways(IWW),justforthepurposeofthisstudy,will be divided into two groups Screw Propellers and Other Propulsors rather than divided according to the principle how they work (as is usually done in the textbooks). Furthermore, having in mind their possible (practical) application, propulsors will be treated together with power transmissions, since they are often distinguished just according to the way power is transmittedfromtheenginetothepropeller.Forinstance,bothpodpropulsors(electrical)and rudderpropellers(mechanical)usethesametypeofpropellers,butaresomehowconsideredto bedifferentpropulsortypes,althoughthedifferencestemsonlyfromtransmissionofpower. Thewayhowthevesselhastobesteeredshouldalsotobeconsidered,sincesomepropulsors inherentlyenablesteering(rudderpropellers/azimuthingthrusters,forinstance),whileothers needanadditionalsteeringdevicearudder.Vesselsteeringandmanoeuvringcapabilitiesare very important and belong to the safety measures which are required by various rules that should be satisfied. Consequently, steering devices are not going to be treated here, except thatarementionedassomepropulsorsneedtherudderwithadequatesteeringgear. 7.2.1. Screwpropellers Themainpropulsorswhichareused(ormaybeused)oninlandvesselsarebasedonascrew propeller(orjustpropeller);thesearethefollowing: FixedpitchpropellerFPP(ormonoblockpropeller)thereareseveralpropellertypes,and canhaveupto7ordinaryorskewedblades(forreducedvibrations)simpleandcheap. Controllable pitch propeller CPP the thrust is controlled by changing the pitch, hence CPP can adapt to resistance variations (due to water depth, freerunning or towing conditionsetc.)advantageousforfastervessels. Propellerinnozzle(Ductedpropeller)increasesthrustifpropellerdiameterisrestricted (thusheavilyloaded)usualcaseonIWW. Contra rotating propellers CRP two propellers turning in opposite direction (thus eliminatingmutualrotatingwake)havethehighestefficiencyamongallpropulsors. Tandem propellers two propellers turning in same direction efficiency is between FPP andCRP. Surface piercing propellers SPP feasible for shallow water since only lower half of the propellerdiscisimmersedstillindesignphase.

Combinationsoftheabovearealsopossible,forinstanceCPPinanozzle.
59

Sinceriversareusuallyrestrictedindepth,propellerdiameterwillalmostalwaysbelimitedand therefore, a ducted propeller in a nozzle is necessary for majority of vessel types. There are various nozzle types; generally for slow speed and high thrust capabilities, a longer nozzle is needed, while for faster vessels a shorter nozzle should be considered. Consequently, fast vesselsshouldusenakedpropeller.

7.2.2. Transmissionofpower Transmission of power from the engine (primemover, usually a diesel engine) can be as follows: Mechanicalhorizontal(traditionalandusualcase,rudderisnecessary) Mechanicalvertical(azimuthingthrusterorrudderpropeller,usuallyturns360o) Electrical(Dieselelectricpropulsion(electricpodpropulsor) Hydraulic(Dieselhydraulicpropulsion(hydrostaticpodpropulsor).

Accordingly,usualtransmissionlossesfromtheenginetopropellerare,respectively: around4%(withgearbox), around10%(gearbox+2pairsofbevelgears), 1015%(energyconversionlosses,mechanicalelectricalmechanical),and 1520%andmore(energyconversionlosses,mechanicalhydraulicmechanical).

Obviously,transmissionlossesfromtheenginetothepropellerarehighinsomecases,whichis often forgotten (note that in the last 50 years of propeller development its efficiency has increasedbysome5%only;inthatcontextitispitytoloseenergyontransmissionlosses).

7.2.3. Propulsorsteeringcapabilities With traditional horizontal shafting arrangement, rudders are necessary, so to some extent they have to be treated together with propulsors. A rudder, or sometimes more than one, should be placed just behind the propeller in its slipstream. For better backward steering capabilitiestheflankingrudders,positionedinfrontofapropeller,areoftenused(appliedon riverpushboats). In all cases where the power transmission line is vertical (often called Zdrive), there is no need for rudders whatsoever, since these azimuthing thrusters provide complete directional thrusting capability by rotating around their vertical axis (usually 360 deg.). In general, enhancedsteeringcapabilitiesofverticalshaftlinethrustershavetobepaidbybreakingthe shaftlineitself,whichresultsinreducedrobustnessandlowerefficiency.
60

7.2.4. Innovativepropellerbasedconce epts nging to the family of azimuthing thrusters) incorporat an f g ) te Pod propulsors (actually belon electricm motorinstalledinthesu ubmergedpod.ProbablythefirstunitsoftheA Azipodtype used on inland waterway were on t Austrian river icebr d ys the n reaker Roethelstein (s Figure 5 see 5.16). Azipodis satradenameofthefi irstpodpropulsoronth hemarket(p producedby yFinishKvae erner Masa+A ABB);itseem mstheyaret theonlypro oducersofco ompactpodpropulsors. .Thewellkn nown INBISHIPProject(Fig gure5.18)wa asbasedonAzipods. Ifpower wouldbetr ransmittedt totheprope ellerviablad detipsinste eadviaboss (theusualc case), thenthat twouldbea atipdrivenpropellerw withoutclass sicalshafts, whichwouldhave,amo ongst others, g good unobst tructed water inflow. A kind of Ele A ectrical TipD Driven prop peller (with both, statoran ndrotorinte egratedinth henozzle)ha asbeendevelopedbyW Westinghouse(calledInt tegral Electric Motor Pro opeller IM M/P), AEG JASTRAM ( (Elektrischer Motorpro r opeller), General DynamicsElectricBo oat(RimDriv venPropelle erRDP),AI IR/VETH(in linepropuls sor)andBru unvol. These ne devices, most of t ew , them still in experime ental stage, seem quit promising for te g applicatio ononriverv vessels(seeFigure7.9). Thereare etwotypesofelectric,t tipdrivenpr ropellers: a) when bearings supporting the propeller axle are co n onnected to the hull by means of strut o y arms(asshowninFigure7.9.a)shaftle essdrive/pro opulsor. b) when nthinsectionbearingislocatedina anozzle.Inthiscasethereisnoneedforanaxle eora prope ellerhub,so othepropell lermaybeo ofanovel(unusual)desi ign,Figure7 7.9.bandc this isbot th,shaftless sandaxlele essorhuble essdrive/pro opulsor.

a)

b)

c)

)electricmo otorpropelle ers Figure7.9Tipdriven(rimdriven) (AEGJastram,Brunvo olandHuble essAIR/VOIT THpropulso ors,somestillprototypes s)


61

SurfaceP PiercingPro opellers(SPP P)haveonly ythelowerh halfofadisc cimmersed inthewaterand therefore earesuitabl leforshallow wdraftvess sels.Theyar reusuallyusedforhighspeedcrafts s,but recentlyAIR(nowVO OITH)starteddevelopingaslowspe eedSPPCPP Pwhichexploitsthefact tthat erates(besid dethethrus st)alargesideforceto oo,whichen nablessteering,andhen ncea SPPgene rudder is not required. Neverth s heless, slow speed SPP are someho clumsy (due to the large ow propeller disc whose bottom ha only prod r e alf duces thrust and have to be used in pairs (du to t) d ue generate edsideforce e),Figure7.1 10.
Vectorprope eller

Figure e7.10Sizecomparison nofVectora andconventi ionalpropeller(Source:VOITHturbo o) 7.2.5. Promising gpropellerb basedpropulsors

Consequently,promisingpropell lerbasedpr ropulsorsfor rIWWwould dbethefollowing: Prope ellers in nozzles (FPP a CPP), with usual (m and mechanical) horizontal o vertical power or trans smissionFigure7.11.a. TandemandCRP Pwithmechanicaltransm missionFig gures7.11.b band7.11.crespectively y. Podp propulsors(dieselelectr ricandhybridwithFPP)Figures7. .12and7.13 3. Comb binationsof fhorizontal mechanical andazimut thingthruste er,eitheron neasideano other with wing pod or rudder p o propulsors o similar (se Figures 5 or ee 5.22 and 5.24), giving good oeuvrability, ,oronebehindtheothe eralsogiving ggoodefficiency(workin ngasCRP). mano

a)

b)

c)

Figure7.11Promisingpropeller rbasedprop pulsorsa)Rudderprop pellerinanintegratednozzle HFPP),b)Ta andemprope eller(SchottelTwinProp pellerSTP)andc)CRP( (VethZDrive e) (VETH
62

Figure7.12CompactAzipoddrive(withoutandwithanozzle).Acompactelectricalmotoris locatedinsidethepodandisdirectlycoupledtotheFPpropeller

Figure7.13Azipodselectricpropulsionandpowerplant

Similartodieselelectricpropulsionisdieselelectrichybridpropulsion(developedbySiemens underthetradenameSISHIPEcoProp).Asmightbeexpected,thehybridpropulsioncomplies with stringent environmental requirements. It can also be integrated with alternative energy sources such as wind, solar or fuel cells. Amongst disadvantages, however, are the high investment costs and higher weight compared to conventional dieselmechanical systems. It has some similarities with dieselelectric propulsion explained above, i.e. a sophisticated controlsystemenablesa)runofasmanydieselpoweredgeneratorsasrequiredtocoverthe powerdemand,b)dieselenginesoperateatoptimumefficiency(independentoftherequired propellershaftspeed)andc)powergeneratedisoptimallydistributedforpropellingtheship andforotherpowerdemands.Anadditionalfeature,however,enablesthebatteriestooperate inthefollowingfourmodes:
63

Diese mode: Po el ower from p propulsion diesels drives a geared generator feeds the ship d r, servic cenet,charg gesthebatteriesandpropelstheve essel. Batte mode: Electrical pow from ba ery wer atteries feed the ship service net and propels the ds vesse el(forinstan ncewhenanchoring,doc ckingorman noeuvringat tlowspeed). Electromode:Po owerfromaharbourgeneratorchargesthebat tteries,and suppliesthe eship servic cenetandp propulsionm motors(forin nstanceforc cruising). Hybri mode: Propulsion d id P diesels drive the vesse with additional pow from ge e el wer eared electrical motors that rece s eive power from a har rbour gener rator (for m maximum power dema and).

The SISH EcoProp electrical m HIP motors and other comp ponents are compact a standard e and dized (ranging from 100 kW to 400 kW per shaft k tline and are used for r road vehicle too). Elec es ctrical motors located in th ship are connected v the gear he via rbox to a ho orizontal pro opeller shaft see t, Figure7.14(thisrequ uiresrudder rs,whichare enotneeded dwhenthee electromoto orisinthep pod).

Figure7.14Purediesel F electricpropulsionandhybridprop pulsionconfiguration (Sour rce:Siemens s) 7.2.6. Otherpro opulsors Notcoun ntingtheclumsysideorsternpaddle ewheels(th hatrequirelo owRPM),which,bytheway, havegoo odefficiency yandareinherentlyada aptedtosha allowdraught(river)ve essels,onlyt three propulso ors,othertha anpropeller rbased,willbementionedhere:

Waterjetora W aPumpjet Verticalprop V peller(produ ucedonlybyVoithandthereforeoft tencalledVo oithSchneid der propeller,som metimesCyc cloidalprope eller) Whaleorfish W htalepropulsors(stillin ndevelopme entphase).

64

Pumpjets,withaverticalaxisareinitiallydevelopedtobebowthrusters,seeFigure7.15.They consist of a mixedflow pump placed in a special volute casing which can rotate about its verticalaxis,enablingsteeringthroughout360degrees.Waterisdrawnintothecasingbelow thehullandisexpelledthroughtheoutletnozzle.Advantagesareapplicabilitytoveryshallow draught vessels, good manoeuvrability, simple hull form, robustness (even grounding is allowed) and reduced jamming. The disadvantage of the Pump Jets are relatively high costs. Moreover, when operating in very shallow waters, Pumpjets may negatively impact the riverbedcausingmotion(redistribution)ofsediments.

Figure7.15SchottelsPumpJetandVethsCompactJet Averticalpropeller(Figure7.16)mightbeusedonvesselsrequiringverygoodmanoeuvrability, since they can produce controllable thrust throughout 360 degrees. Nevertheless, vertical propellers are relatively complicated and therefore expensive. They are not as efficient (as ordinarypropellers)sincetheirverticalbladesgeneratethrustonlyoverapartofrevolutionat acostofeverpresentfrictionalresistance. The principle of the vertical axis propeller can be applied to a cycloidal propulsor having horizontalshaftaswell.Thisisthebasicideaofthewhaletailpropulsor(Figure7.17)whichis stillinthedevelopmentphase.

Figure7.16VerticalVoithSchneider propeller

Figure7.17Whaletalearrangement (Source:CREATINGWP5)
65

7.2.7. Ratingofpropulsors AnattemptwasmadetocompareallmentionedpropulsorsonthesamebasisseeTable7.1. Picking out just one of them and rating it separately, would, probably, bring to different conclusionsfromthosegiveninTable7.1. Table7.1PropulsorapplicabilityonapotentialIWWvessel
Maturity (developingphase) Costofapropulsor Transmissiontype Environmental pollution Manoeuvring capabilities Builtincost Robustness Extraspace onavessel No. Propulsiveefficiency

TYPEOFA PROPULSOR
NakedFPP NakedFPP NakedCPP NakedCPP DuctedFPP DuctedFPP DuctedCPP DuctedCPP Ringpropeller SteerablenozzleFPP Tandempropeller CRP SlowspeedSPP PodpropulsorFPP HydrostaticFPP Tipdriven,shaftlessFPP Tipdriven,hublessFPP Pumpjet Verticalpropeller

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

MHor MVer MHor MVer MHor MVer MHor MVer MHor MHor MVer MVer MHor EVer HVer EHor EHor MVer MVer

+ + ++ + + + ++ ? ?

+ ++ + ++ + ++ ++ ? ++ + ++ ++

++ ++ ++ + ? ++

+ ++ ++ ++ ++

++ + + ? ? ?

+ ++ + ++ ++ ++ + ++ ++ + ++ ++ + + +

++ + ++ + + + +

+ + + + ? ++ + ++ ++ +

Abbreviations:Rating

Transmissiontypes Mmechanical Eelectrical Hhydraulic HORhorizontal VERvertical

++verygood +good average bad ?notknown

Note:HORarrangements needarudder(except incases10and13),while VERarrangements,justby rotatingthepropelleralongtheverticalaxis,generatethrustinalldirections,hencedonotneedrudder.

66

7.2.8. ImprovementofHullPropulsorinteractions Largepotentialsforenergysavingslayinimprovementsofinteractionsbetweenthehullanda propulsor(i.e.propeller).AsexplainedatthebeginningofSections3and7,theintentionisto increase efficiency of a propulsor D (which depends on hullpropulsor interaction and is expressedthroughthesocalledpropulsivecoefficients).Inotherwords,theaftshipshouldbe adaptedto:a)particularpropulsor,andb)thewaterway(i.e.waterdepthwhichvaryfrom oneriverstretchtoanother).So,aftshipshouldbedesignedinsuchawaythatadvantagesof navigationindeepwaterarefullyexploited(witharelativelyundisturbedinflowofwatertothe propeller),whilemaintainingpossibilitiesofshallowwateroperationinpartlyloadedcondition. Thiscanberealizedwithanadjustabletunnel(Figure7.18,seealsoFigure7.5),whichis depending on the draught aligned with the hull (upper photo), or with fins folded downwards (lower photo) to prevent entrance of incoming air into propeller at low draught. Thus,thepropulsionefficiencysignificantlyincreasesathigherdraughtsasnoparts,likewith fixed tunnel forms, prevent water inflow. In addition, a ship with adjustable tunnel is able to operateatlowerdraughtsthanwithoutit,therebynotjeopardizingpropellerefficiencycaused by air intake. Actually it enables a ship without a tunnel to operate efficiently under partly loadedconditiontoo.Adjustabletunnelisnotyetimplementedinfullscale,onlymodeltests werecarriedoutinDST.Savingsofabout10%areexpected.

Figure7.18Adjustabletunnelforinlandvessel (Source:www.naiades.info/wiki/index.php5/Adjustable_tunnel)

67

7.3.

Innovationsinpropulsionplantsandfuels (withtheaimtoreducefuelconsumptionandpollutantemissions) 7.3.1. DieselEngines

Diesel engines dominate IWW nowadays. Modern engines that are nowadays used on inland ships are often marinized generalapplication diesel engines (generatingset engines having 1500 or 1800 rpm for 50 or 60 Hz, respectively) or are truck engines. Both engine types are muchlighterandcheaperthantheirpredecessors(thathad700800rpm),nottomentionthat they are an order of magnitude cleaner than the older ship engines. As a consequence, contemporarygearboxeshavehighergearratiosthanthoseoffewdecadesago. AccordingtosomeESTstudies(EnvironmentallySustainableTransport)itisnotexpectedthat majorbreakthroughtechnologies(concerningshipengines)willbemadeinthenext20orso years. Furthermore, environmental considerations will, without any doubt, guide and force engine development. As the shipping industry is too small to drive the development of new typesofpropulsionplants,truckengineswillprobablyhavetobeusedastheprimemoverson inlandwaterwayshipsinnextdecades.Inthemeantime,emissionproblemswithdieselengines willbecomemuchmorepronouncedthanisthecasetoday. 7.3.2. Emissionproblems Dieselengines(andfuels)areconstantlydevelopedwiththeaimtoreduceharmfulemissions (and consumption, of course). The quantity of the following substances in exhaust gases is relevantforevaluatingdieselenginecleanliness: Carbondioxide(CO2) Carbonmonoxide(CO) Nitrogenoxide,NOandNO2(NOX) Sulphuroxides,SOandSO2(SOX) Uniciratedhydrocarboncompounds(HCX) Sootparticles(PM) Among these, probably the most relevant single substance is carbon dioxide (CO2) which contributestoclimatechange(globalwarming)seeCrist(2009). Notethatdifferentabatementmethodshavetobeappliedforeachcomponent: CO2dependsdirectlyontheamountoffuelconsumption NOxdoesnotdependonconsumption,butondesignandstateoftheengine PMismainlycarbonparticles(soot),anddependsonmaintenanceandfueltype SOxdependsonthetypeofdieselfuel(sulphurcontentofthefuel)

68

7.3.3.

Exhauste emissionlegi islation

EU, ad machinery ( are inland vessels) are regulat (as ted by Dire ective In the E NonRoa mobile m 97/68/EC C,whileintheUSemiss sionstandar rdsaremanagedbythe eEPAregula ationsformarine vehicles. These stan ndards are constantly upgraded and in a w are al way live. Regulatory authorities are aske ed/forced b engine m by manufacture to harm ers monise worldwide emission standard dsfordiffere entmarketsinordertos simplifyeng ginedevelopment.Asac consequence,EU emission limits for nonroad m n machinery St tage I/II wer harmonis (more o less) with the re sed or h eUSlimitso ofTier1/2,andStageIII/ /IVwithUST Tier3/4stan ndards.StageIII/IVstand dards adequate applyonlytonewve ehiclesande equipment.StageIIIstandardsaref furtherdivid dedintotwo osub stages: S Stage IIIA an Stage IIIB see Figure 7.19. Stage IIIA standards, among others, c nd B, e e gst cover enginesu usedinIWW Wvessels,se eeTable7.2 2.Asarough hestimateitispredicte edthatStageIIIA willreduceinlandan ndcoastalemissionsbyaround50% %,butthese ebenefitsw willtakevery ylong reach.Atthemoment, therearenoStageIIIB orStageIV Vstandardsf forIWWves ssels, timetor butitmig ghtbeexpec cted,bymir rroringEPAr regulations,thatinthen nearfuturet theywillapp plyto IWWves sseltoo,seeFigure7.20. . Figure7 7.19EPAan ndEUNonR Roademissio onsregulatio ons(37560kW) 7.3.4. Findingsf fromtheCRE EATINGproj ject yspeaking, shipengines sonlyhave CO2emissio onslowerthanthetruck kengines(dueto Generally lowerconsumption. SeeAppend dix6),while eNOX,PMan ndSOXemissionsarehig gher.There eason for this lies in differ rent emissio regulation for road vehicles (tru engines) and ships (ship on ns uck engines), ,seeFigure 7.21.Notet thatinthiss sectionCCNRnormsare eassumedtoberelevan ntfor IWT;CCN NRIIalmostcorrespond dstoEUStag geIIIA.

69


Table 5 Table7.2StageIIIAstandardsforIWWvessels Stage III A Standards for Inland Waterway Vessels (Source:www.dieselnet.com/standards/eu/nonroad.php)
Cat. Displacement (D) dm per cylinder V1:1 V1:2 V1:3 V1:4 V2:1 V2:2 V2:3 V2:4 V2:5 D 0.9, P > 37 kW 0.9 < D 1.2 1.2 < D 2.5 2.5 < D 5 5 < D 15 15 < D 20, P 3300 kW 15 < D 20, P > 3300 kW 20 < D 25 25 < D 30 2009.01 2007.01 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
3

Date

CO

NOx+HC g/kWh 7.5 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.8 8.7 9.8 9.8 11.0

PM

0.40 0.30 0.20 0.20 0.27 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50

Source:MTU

Figure7.20EUExhaustemissionlegislationcomparisonofMarine/Mobilemachinery Obviouslyemissionregulationsforroadvehicles(EURO)andIWTaredifferent.Inadditionthere isconsiderabletimelaginimplementationofEURO&CCNRemissionregulations.Takinginto accountthatshipenginesaremucholderthantruckenginesandthattheybelongtoprevious technological generation (with a lifetime of at least 20 years for ship engines vs. 5 years for trucks), emission legislation becomes extremely important. The abovementioned is actually themainreasonshipsarenotascleanaspreviouslyclaimed. IntheCREATINGproject(whoseobjectivewastofindsolutionstoimprovetheenvironmental performanceofIWT)emissionswerecomparedbetweenIWWshipsaRhineselfpropelled

70

Figure7.21Emissionlegislationforroadvehiclesandships

vessel,DanubeRoRovesselandDanubecouplingtrainandatruckonthebasisoftkmwas evaluated. Surprising results were obtained, see Figure 7.22. Taking into account that fuel consumptionpertkmofwaterbornetransportisroughly1/3ofthatofroadtransport,andthat truckshavecleanerengines,followsthat: a)ShipsareNOTsocleanintermsofNOxandPM,unlessEmissionReductionTechniques(ERT) areapplied,and b)StandardsaccordingtoCCNRIII(correspondingtoEUROV)maybemetonlybyapplication ofERT(inparticularSCR+PMF+LSF)(seeFigure7.22andTable7.3).

Figure7.22EmissioncomparisonsbetweenconsideredIWWships andatruckonthebasisoftkm

71

Emission Reduction Technologies ERT consist of several compatible and complementary measures(Table7.3): FirststepReductionofallowedsulphurformarineoildiesel Goal: 0.1% (which is still 100 x higher than for trucks), otherwise even IWT cannot compete with trucks in terms of emissions (this fuel is supposed to be available throughouttheEUin2011) SecondstepApplicationofnewdieselenginetechnologiesandexhaustgascleaning. Olderenginesshouldberetrofittedwithaftertreatmentdevices. Table7.3Changesinmassemissionscomparedwithabasic casewithoutreductiontechniques(CCNR1)
NOX PM F.C. CO2 SOX

Aftertreatmenttechniques SCR PMF 81% none 35% 85% 7.5% +2% 7.5% +2% 7.5% +2%

Drivemanagementsystem ATM 10% 10% 10% 10% 10%

Dieselfuelquality BD BDB LSF +10% +2% none 30% 6% 17% +15% +3% none 65% 13% none 100% 20% 100%

Newenginetechniques NGE
SCRSelectiveCatalystReduction PMFParticulateMassFilter ATMAdvisingTempomaat BDBiodiesel BDBBiodieselBlend(80%fossil+20%BD) LSFLowSulphurFuel NGENaturalGasEngine F.C.ChangesinFuelconsumption

98.5%

97.5%

+4.5

10%

100%


72

So,togettheclimatefriendlyIWWShipaccordingto: CCNRIII(correspondstoEUROV)fromaCCNRIship,itisnecessarytoapplySCR+PMF +ATM+LSF(seeTable7.3).AccordingtotheCREATINGproject,thisgreeningonIWW should be stimulated by financial interests (investment cost of application of SCR+PMF+ATM+LSF is supposed to return in 3 years). It should be noted that application of just biodiesel (BD) is not sufficient, and its application is controversial anyway.Notethatoldshipengineswillprolongimplementationforca.20years! For EURO VI emissions, similar fuel & engine technology as truck engines is necessary (which brings new problems), or a completely new engine technology (Natural Gas Engines,FuelCells)shouldbeapplied.

WithintheCREATINGproject,theDemonstratorthecleanestshipeverwassuppliedwith the abovementioned technologies. This was the lowemission, fuel efficient and environmentallyfriendly BP motor tank vessel Victoria (60x11.45 m, 1300 t, with MTU 880 kW/1800rpm).Exhaustfiguresaswellassavings,whichareconstantlyupgraded,canbefound atwww.cleanestship.eu/chartsandarebasedon3000operationalhoursperyear,anaverage deliveredpowerof70%andafuelconsumptionof203g/kWh.Theundertakenmeasureswere: LowsulphurEN590fuel(equaltoroadstandard)wasusedreducesSOx&PM APM&SCRcatalystinthesamereactor(selectivecatalyticreduction&sootfilter)was implemented,producedbyHugEngineeringreducesNOx&PM ATM(theAdvisingTempomaat)producedbyTechnoFysicaenabledoptimaloperation ofthevesselreducesCO2

Regarding the same subject, Schweighofer & Blaauw (2008) and Schweighofer & Seiwerth (2007)papersshouldbealsoconsulted. 7.3.5. Innovationsinpropulsionplants PossibleinnovationsaredepictedinFigure7.23.Notethatdarkerpartsofthetablemeanshort ormediumtermapplications,whilewhiteonesaremediumandlongtermnicheapplications. Actually, the darker parts were explained above, while the white parts dieselelectric, gas enginesandfuelcellsdeservefurtherdiscussion.

73

Fig gure7.23In nnovationso ofpropulsionplantsand dfuels(Source:CREATIN NGproject) Dieselelectricconce eptsarenotsofarinthe efuture;the eyarealread dyappliedon nseavessels sand on the IWW icebreaker Roeth helstein (se Figure 5.16). This concept was also applie in ee s ed INBISHIPproject(see eSection5.2 2.1andFigur re7.13). Natural gas engines (NGE) are actually die s esel engines that, inste of ordin s ead nary fuel oil, use liquefied natural ga (LNG). T as The necessa engine adaptations for LNG a present day ary s are t technolo ogyandthe mainproble emissafefu uelstorageo onboard(or within)the shipitself(t tobe inliquid formgasha astobecool ledandpres ssurized).Co omparedto conventiona aldieseleng gines, entandhave elowerenvir ronmentalim mpact. NGEaremoreefficie Fuelcells s(FC)areno owadaysuse edonsubmarines,whileR&Dwork kisfocused onroadveh hicles andstationarypowe erplants,butthegoalo ofzeroemiss sionisdrivin ngdevelopm mentofhydr rogen FCandh hydrogensto oragemetho ods.FCaree electrochem micaldeviceswhichconv vertthechemical energyofafuel(forexamplehyd drogenorna aturalgas)in ntodirectcu urrentpower.BureauVe eritas ently publish hedguidelin for safe application of FC on sh nes hips. Concer rningcomme ercial (BV) rece shipappl lication,vari ioustypesof fFCareinth heresearch/ /experiment talphase. Withinth heINBATpr roject,FCpo owerwasex xamined(see eZenczaket tal.2003)fo oralowdra aught pushboat tandwasco omparedtovariantsof dieselpowe erplants.Re egardingweight,FCpow weris comparabletoacon nventionalshippowerp plantwitha mechanical ltransmissio on,however r,the costofFC Cwasconsid derablyhigherthanothe erenginesth hatwerecon nsidered. Within the EU supp ported Lifeproject Zem mships (Zero Emission Ship) the first FC pow o wered passenge ershipFCS Alsterwasse erwasdev veloped(Figu ure7.24).Sh hewasdesig gnedasam mono hull ship with two fuel cells of 50 kW and a carrying capacity of 100 passengers. The sh is hip
74

fuelledbyhydrogen,whichisstoredonboardatapressureof350bar.Theshipis25.5mlong andhasadraughtof1.2m.ThevesselhasbeensailingontheAlsterinHamburgsinceAugust 2008.FCSAlsterwasserisregardedtobethefirstIWWpassengervesselwhereFCareused forthemainpropulsion.BesideZemshipproject,thereareotherprojectsonFCapplicationson maritime vessels, as for instance MOSTH, FelowSHIP, FCSHIP etc., all with a goal to obtain a nearzeroemissionshipengine.Consequently,therearealsoanumberofreportsavailableon theinternet.

Figure7.24TheFCSAlsterwasser (Source:www.naiades.info/wiki/index.php5/Zemships__Zero_Emission_Ships)

7.4. Innovationsimportantforbettershiputilisation/navigation (withtheaimtoreduceshipspeedandincreasecosteffectivenessandsafety) RiverInformationServices(RIS)providepossibilitiesforvoyageplanning,trackingandtracing, bothfromvesselsandfromshores.Improvedcommunicationandinformationexchangewithin thesystemindirectlycontributestotheoptimisationoffuelconsumption.Thiscanbeachieved, for instance, through the exchange of information related to lock operation, port/terminal planning,customsetc.ononeside,andskippersonanother,givingrelevantinformationabout the ship (her position, speed, destination, cargo etc.). According to received information, a skipper can calculate the estimated time of arrival (ETA) to a certain destination, and, if possible, reduce/adjust ship speed. Amongst others, this might result in reduction of fuel consumption.

75

Software esolutionsf foradvanced drouteplan nningareav vailablenow wadays.Inso omecasesro oute planning software relies on the data provided within the unique RIS environment. Plan e e nning procedur resbeforethejourneya arealsopos ssible,since RISprovide esreliablein nformationa about thewate erdepthand dpotentialo obstaclesontheintende edroute.InlandECDISc chartsare,inthe firstplace,developed dtoprovide eadditionals safety,buta alsoenablen navigationw withanoptim mised speed. Afterthe einitialsucce essofGermanELWIS,A AustrianDOR RISandtheE EUprojectA ALSODanube e,the importan of RIS fo inland na nce or avigation rapidly increa ased. As a re esult, the C COMPRIS Pro oject, together with its extensions CRORIS and YURIS w e were a further step towards the full e impleme entationoft theRISonth heDanube River.More eover,theEC Cprepared thesocalledRIS Directive e,whichsets supalegalf frameworkforRiverInfo ormationSer rvicesinEur rope. Concerni ingtheDanube,RIStec chnologyisa alreadyused don theAu ustriansecto oroftheDanube andcerta ainlywillbeusedonthe ewholeDanu ubeinthenearfuture. On board computer risation and RIS applica d ation (Figure 7.25) in ad e ddition to cr rew training can g lead to socalled ecosailing (e equivalent t ecodriving which is nowadays widely ap to s s pplied througho Europe resulting in fuel reduc out n ctions of 5 to 10%). Fo instance, in Holland, the or Ecodrivin Programm Voortvarend Bespar (Saving While Sailing) was in ng me ren g nitiated with the h goaltore educefuelc consumption nandpolluta antemission nsfrominlan ndvessels(p partoftheD Dutch Air Quali Action Plan, see ww ity ww.voorvarendbesparen.nl). According to DNV, shipowners can , s reduceairemissions supto15% fromships, usingavailabletechnolo ogyontodaysshipswit thout incurring gadditionalc costs!

Figure7.25 5Bridgecomputerizatio ononriverv vessel(Sourc ce:Wittevee enBos)

76

7.5. Concludingremarks InordertoachievemoreefficientandcleanerIWT,contemporarylogisticsconceptsshouldbe applied.Transhipmentshouldbecheapandfast,andthewaterbornepartoftransportshould beefficient.Concerningthelastitem,besidesthemeasuresthatoftendonotdependonship design(crewcosts,taxes,loanandfuelcosts),thefollowingisnecessary(accordingtoFigure 7.1): a) b) c) d) Reductionoftotalresistance Increaseofpropulsionefficiency Reductionoffuelconsumption Reductionofshipspeed(ifpossible)

Ofcourse,otheraspectsofshipdesignshouldnotbeforgotten,i.e.safetymeasuresandcheap production. To achieve this goal it is necessary to obtain the following (according to the conclusionsofeachsubsectionofchapter7): In order to maximise the gains and minimise the costs, it is important to involve the hydrodynamicexpertiseatanearlydesignstage.Oftenagood,lowresistancehullformcan beobtainedonlyifmodelexperimentsarecarriedoutinspecializedtowingtanks. Weightreductionispossiblenotonlybyapplyingthelatesttechnologies(likeSPS),butin the first place by not unreasonable accumulating the additional weight by thickening the hullstructuremorethanrulesarerequiring. To obtain good propulsion efficiency, new propulsors should be considered (see Sections 7.2.5.and7.2.7). Newenginetypesshouldbeconsideredforshipapplications,mostprobablyderivedfrom general application diesel engines or road vehicles. Exhaust emission legislation measures areimportantforcleannessofshipengines.Figure7.26depictsPMandNOxemissionsfor EURO,CCNRandStageIIIAstandards.Thepreconditionforlowemissionsis,however,low sulphurfuel.CO2emissionschargescouldbecomeeffectiveinthenearfuture(i.e.fuelcost mightincludeenvironmentallyrelevantsurchargesbasedonSOXandCO2),solowemission engineswillpayoffinshorterperiodoftime. For better ship utilisation, commandbridge computerisation is necessary through applicationofRISandothercontemporaryITachievements.Butaboveall,crewtrainingis necessary (particularly on the Danube) that would result in higher safety measures and betterecosailingcapabilities.AccordingtoDNVshipsfromallmarketsegmentscanreduce theirairemissionsbycarefullyanalyzingandoptimizinganumberofindividualoperations, such as optimizing engine performance, optimizingtrim for all drafts and speeds and the
77

propu ulsion system efficiency andimpro y oving voyage managem e ment. Actuall all aspec of ly, cts ship operations should be th s horoughly reviewed in order to inc crease efficiency and re educe emiss sions.

Figure7.26PMandNOxemiss sionsforEURO,CCNRan ndStageIIIA Astandards (Sourc ce:CREATING GProject) Most of the measur mentione above m be and s res ed may should be applied for a new build all dings. Neverthe eless,themajorityofex xistingoldan ndoftennot twellmaint tainedvesse elscanbenefitby applyingsomeofthe eabovemen ntionedmea asures.Note ethattheD Danubefleetisonaverag ge20 years yo ounger than that on th Rhine, but is by far in worse shape due to unaccep he r ptable negligenc ceandlacko ofregularm maintenance(Figure7.27 7).

Figu ure7.27Tu ugboat,Belg grade,2008

78

8.

CUSTOMDESIGNEDVESSELSFORTHEDANUBERIVER

Withtheaimtodemonstratehowacontemporary,safe,costeffective,shallowdraughtvessel intendedparticularlyfortheDanubewaterwayshouldlooklike,someoftheconclusionsand technicalachievementsaimedatincreasingefficiencyofinlandnavigation,anddiscussedinthe previoussections,willbeincorporatedintodesignoftwospecificshiptypes: Selfpropelledcontainervessel Bargetrain(actuallyapushboat)forbulkcargo.

These two distinct ship type concepts are chosen because they are good representatives of typicalshipsusedontheDanube.Thisdoesnotmeanthatselfpropelledvesselsareassigned justforthecontainertransportorbargetrainsforbulkcargo,northatinnovationsintegrated into one concept cannot be applied in the other. Concepts would be able to operate on the navigabletributaries,RMDwaterwayandothercanals,naturallywithcertainrestrictionsthat aregiveninTable2.3andFigure2.4. Needless to say, but new vessels have to be built (hence designed and operated through its lifetime)incompliancewithvariousinternationalandnationalrulesandregulations.Thisis,per se,aguaranteethatthevesselwillbesafeandenvironmentallyacceptable(seeAppendices4 and7).Also,itisusuallyunderlinedthatashipandherequipmentwillbemadeaccordingto goodshipbuildingpracticeandexperience,standardsoftheyardetc.;thosephrases,however, donotmeanmuchastheyarenotsocompulsory,althoughtheyaresaidworldwide. Conceptswillbefollowedwithasectiononpossibleconversionsandretrofittingmeasureswith asimilarpurpose,i.e.toshowapplicationofnewtechnologiesonalreadyexistingvessels.

8.1.

Selfpropelledshipfortransportofcontainers

Special attention was paid to existing navigation conditions on the Lower Danube, but as it mightbeexpectedthatthecontainervesselwouldoperateonthewholeDanube,restrictions oftheUpperDanubewerealsotakenintoconsideration.Anoptimisedvessel,ingeneral,was briefly explained in Section 2.1, restrictions of the Danube waterway in Section 2.3 and its implications on ship design in 2.4. The cargo that should be transported intermodal loading units (ISO containers and EILUs), their size etc. are explained in Section 4.2, while main characteristicsofconventionalselfpropelledvesselssuitedfortheDanubewaterwayaregiven inSection6.

79

8.1.1. ProposedfeaturesofaDanubecontainershipconcept Theobjectivehereistoexplain(inwords)howsuccessfulshallowwatercontainervesselcould looklike.Therefore,therecommendedvesseldimensionsandotherimportantcharacteristics tobeincorporatedintodesignarethefollowing: Draught (T) 2.5 m maximum for three layers of full containers of average mass of 13 t (see Figure 6.2). With two layers of full containers, draught will be up to 1.85 m. Nevertheless,accordingtotransportstatistics,onaverage2/3ofallcontainersareloaded and 1/3 are empty (with a mass of ca. 2 t only). Therefore, it might be expected that in reality draught will be smaller than stated above. If reduced draught sailing would be necessary,acouplingtrainshouldbeconsidered. Breadth (B) 11.65 m (cargo hold breadth just above 10.3 m) allows abreast loading of fourISOcontainersor2.502.55mwidedomesticcontainersEILUs(seesection4.2).Note that the usual ship breadth is up to 11.45 m (due to locks and gangway restrictions), but keeping in mind the extensive use of palletwise EILUs within Europe (other transport modes are using them) and that the competitiveness of IWT should be increased, a ship widthof11.65missuggested(althoughlocksontheUpperDanubeare12or24mwide, see Table 2.2 and 2.3). Note that for the Rhine corridor the breadth of 11.65 m was requested, but is not allowed yet. Concerning the Danube, downstream of Vilshofen the allowedbreadthcouldbeanythingupto23.4m(seeSection2.4),butkeepinginmindthat thelargerthebreadthis,thelargershipresistanceandwavewashis.Abreadthof11.65m waschosenasagoodoverallcompromise. Length(L)104mfollowsfromthedesiredcargoholdlengthofaround80m.Withinthis length,longitudinally13TEUsmaybestowedwith2050mmclearancebetweenthem(this requires toplift transhipment with a spreader). A hold length of 80 m allows also a wide varietyofotherstowingpossibilities,forinstance(6x40+1x20),(4x45+4x20),(4xA1360 +4x20),(9xC745+2x20),etc.Discussiongiveninsection6.2(longorbeamyvessel)and 7.1.2(L/Hratio)explainswhythelongershipisnotrecommended.Furthermore,withthis shiplength,acouplingtrainwithastandard77mDanubebargewouldbeshorterthan185 m(seeTable5.1). Height (H) 3.1 m. This is a discussible subject and is beyond the scope of this study. Namely,freeboard(F)of0.6mandsafetyclearanceof1000mm(i.e.hatchcoamingheight ofatleast400mm)issuggestedforZone3(theDanube)andforthevesselsoftypeC(open holdvessels)seeUNECEAmendmentoftheRecommendations,GLandsimilarrules. Nevertheless,takingintoaccountsomerecentdisastersduetoinsufficientsafetyclearance (seeHofmanetal2006)F = 0.6 m and a coaming height of 1.1 missuggested,whichis morethanrequiredbytherules.Besides,H=3.1alsosatisfiesGLsuggestionforL/35.

80

Shipformshouldbeoptimisedforlowresistancenavigationinshallowwater.Theform shouldberelativelyfull(bothCBandCParound0.9),withfullforeandafterbodyproviding substantial buoyancy (hence allowing larger payload) at low draughts. This, however, will inevitablyincreaseresistance.Afterbodyisstronglyinfluencedbypropellerdiameterand propulsortype(twinrudderpropellersofrelativelysmalldiameterareimaginedhere).Ship formshouldmirrorweightdistribution(accommodationinthefront,enginesatthestern) whichshouldreducethetrimofpartlyloadedship.Theabovewaterbowformshouldbe adaptedforpushing(couplingtrainformation).Note,however,thathullformoptimisation withthepurposetoreduceresistancerequiresmodeltesting(seesection7.1.1). Ship weight should be reduced by around 10% compared to conventional designs by applyingstateofthearttechnologies,probablyhightensilesteelforthehullstructure(see section 5.1.1 vessel Sava Mala), SPS or aluminium for superstructure. Capital weight savings, however, should not be expected, but overall weight savings within the classical steelbuildingapproachmightbeobtained(seeSection7.1.2).Althoughsomewhatopposite to the weight savings, ballasting is often necessary, so ballast tanks should be considered too. Propulsion two rudder (azimuthing) propellers in nozzles with D1.35 moptimisedfor bothlowdraughtandfulldraughtoperation,seeSections7.2.3to7.2.5.Propulsorsmaybe a) of innovative design, for instance dieselelectric with Azipods (INBISHIP concept, see section5.2.1andFigures7.12and7.13),orb)conventionalmechanicalZ drive rudder propellers(seeFigure7.11).Bothwilleliminatetheneedforruddersandwillalsoenable exceptional manoeuvring capabilities. If dieselelectric propulsion is envisaged then an innovativetipdrivenpropulsormightalsobeconsidered(seeSection7.2.4andFigure7.9). Abowthrusterofaround250kW(withtheabilitytoassiststoppingandimprovethrust fourchannel)eitherdieselorelectricallydriven,shouldbeconsidered. Engines low emission diesel engines satisfying Stage IIIA/Tier 3 norms or better (see Section 7.3.3) with relatively high power to weight ratios should be considered. If diesel electric propulsion would be applied (Azipods), then a power of around 4x400 kW is suggested; for mechanical rudder propellers around 2x700 kW or so would be sufficient. Powerisestimatedforanassumedspeedof16km/h,aswellasacouplingtrainformation withone,probablytwoDanubebarges(dependingonwaterwayconditions).Dieselelectric propulsion is ecologically very attractive, but is also more expensive than mechanical transmission.NearzeroemissionFCorsimilar(seeSection7.3.5)shouldntbeexpectedto beseenonIWvesselsinnextdecadeortwo.Nevertheless,infuturedieselelectricsetsmay bereplacedbyFC,soelectricallydrivenrudderpropellers(ofAzipodtypeortipdriven/rim driven)mightberegardedasthepropulsorofthefuture. Shoretoshippowersupply(ofelectricitywhileinport,oftencalledcoldironing)shouldbe consideredwiththeaimtoreduceonboarddieselemissions.
81

Accommodation,wheelhouseandengineroom.Allcrewpremisesshouldbedimensioned according to UNECE Recommendations based on six crew members and should be positioned in the bow (the wheelhouse too), while the engines (placed in well insulated spaces)shouldbeatthestern.Thisenablesgoodvisibility(hencesafetytoo),crewcomfort (novibrationsandnoise)andawellbalancedshipatlowdraughts. Electronics and computerisation should of latest generation, providing a oneman bridge systemincludingadatabasedshipmonitoringsystem(engineandshipsystemmonitoring andrecording,voyageoptimization,etc.);seeSection7.4. An onboard crane with a capacity 35t/30m should be considered as this would allow transhipment at any port (see Figure 5.5). However, this would reduce the number of containersthatcouldbetransported.

Itshouldbenotedhoweverthattheshipowner,accordingtohisownrequirements,judgments of the market trends and costs, usually requires a specific ship to be designed/built (having particular dimensions, carrying capacity, engines, equipment) and that design freedom as exercisedaboveisveryseldom.Forinstance,shipspeed,whichisamongstthemostinfluential designparameters,wasomittedinthisdiscussion.

8.1.2.Generalarrangementplanofacontainershipconcept A General Arrangement (GA) plan of a container ship concept is shown in Figure 8.1 and its enlarged bow and stern parts, in Figures 8.2 and 8.3, respectively. Two additional variants of thesameconceptaredepictedinFigures8.4and8.5.Namely,dieselelectricpropulsionanda conventionalmechanical(azimuthing)rudderpropellermaybeemployedseeFigure8.4.An onboardcraneisdepictedintheGAplan,Figure8.5(withamechanicaltransmissionalready showninFigure8.4)resultinginreducedcarryingcapacity,seebelow.Themainparticularsof theabovementionedvesselsarethefollowing: Loam Boam Hm Tm Holdlengthm Holdwidthm Heightabovebasislinem PBkW TEU(3layers/4layers) Payloadcapacityt Configuration BasicWithaCrane 104.0 102.5 11.65 11.65 3.1 3.1 2.5 2.5 80.0 78.5 10.34 10.34 8.3 8.3 4x400 2x700 156/208 134/172 1950 1800
82

Figure8.1G GeneralArra angement planofacon ntainershipconcept dieselelectr d ricpropulsio on


83

Figu ure8.2Enla argedbowp part(bothva ariants) 8.1.3. A Advantageso ofaconceptcomparedt toconventio onalships Some of the concepts feature (underline below) s f es ed suggest an environmen ntally accep ptable vessel w with a large volume a e and payload capacity. At the sa d ame time d due to sup perior manoeuv vring capabilities, the p proposed co oncept shou be safer than similar selfprop uld pelled vesselso ontheRhineandDanube e.So: Spec attentio was paid to lowdr cial on d raught perf formance. C Consequently, the prop posed conc ceptshouldbeabletoo operatesucc cessfullyand dthereforeb becosteffectiveatboth hlow drau ught of up to 1.71.8 m (with two container layers) and f draught of up to 2 m t m full t 2.5 (with3layersof ffullcontain nersoreven4layersofm mixedfullan ndemptycontainers). The chosenhold dlength(80 0m)andbre eadth(10.34 4m)allows stowingofa avarietyof 2.50 2.55 m wide do 5 omesticcon ntainers(EILUsofC745 andA1360 type),besid destheusua alISO cont tainers (TEU and FEUs). By the wa the sam hold leng and som Us ay, me gth mewhat narr rower brea adthhascon ntemporary MGS,which his110mlo ong(vs.prop posed104m m).Theconc cepts over dimensi rall ions 104x11 1.65 m allo ows passage through all Danube locks, eve in e en coup plingtrainfo ormation.
84

Figure8.4 Enlargedste ernpart v variant withconven ntionalZdr riverudderpropellers

art Figure e8.3 Enlarg gedsternpa varian ntwithdiese elelectricpr ropulsion

85

Figure8. .5GA plan nofa containershipconce ept variantw withconvent tional rudderp propellersan nd onboardcrane
86

Anonboardcranewouldallowtranshipmentatanyportwhichwouldbeanadvantage particularlyontheMiddleandLowerDanubewhereadequatecontainerports(hubs)and dedicated container transhipment equipment are rare. However, this would reduce the numberofcontainersthatcouldbetransported. Rudderpropulsorsenableexceptionalmanoeuvringcharacteristics(steering&stopping) even at low draughts, resulting in a safer ship. If dieselelectrical propulsion would be installed, then additional benefits would be evident, i.e. better adaptation to various operation/sailing modes (upstream/downstream, speed and coupling train formation requiring employment of 1, 2, 3 or all 4 diesel engines). This would also reduce fuel consumption (probably by 10% in upstream and even more in downstream navigation), therefore emission levels would be lower as engines would run at optimal RPM/loading. For refrigerated containers and other large electricity consumers (a bow thruster for instance), the same electrical network could be used, eliminating the need for auxiliary units. Conventional, mechanicallydriven rudderpropellers have the advantage of being cheaperandretractable(hencecanbetteradapttowaterdepths). Thepositionofengines/engineroomatthesternandthecrewpremisesatthebowoffers additional crew comfort (reduced vibrations and noise). Application of contemporary equipmentandelectronicsenablessafersailingandloweroveralloperationalcosts. 8.2. Bargetrainfortransportofbulkcargo The main advantage of a push train, or barge transport, compared to selfpropelled ship transport,isthatcosteffectivenavigationwithreduceddraughtwithpartlyloadedbargesmay beutilized.Usuallyitisthedraughtofapushboatthatposesthemainproblem,asitcannotbe reduced below a certain level (the transom and propellers should have designed minimal draught,otherwisetheycannotworkproperly).ConventionalDanubepushboatswithapower ofaround2000kWusuallyhavedraughtofmorethan1.7to1.8m,meaningthatthisdraught isactuallyalimitingfactor.Duetothat,pullingtechnologywasnevercompletelyabandonedon theDanubeastowingvesselshavelowerdraught(usuallybelow1.5m)andarethereforeused duringthedryseasons.Consequently,alowdraughtpushboatwithapowerofaround2000kW wouldbemorethanadvantageousontheDanube. Ifnavigationwithareduceddraughtwouldberequired,thentosubstituteforreducedcarrying capacity,thenumberofbargesinaconvoymightbeincreased;powerneededforpushingthis convoy would not increase proportionally (see Section 5.1.2); this is the main advantage of pushboat technology). Suggested power of around 2000 kW would be sufficient for sailing alongthewholeDanubeatusualpushtrainspeedswithuptosixfullyloadedDanubebarges (withacarrying1500to1600teach).TonnagecapacityatreduceddraughtofatypicalDanube barge(77x11x2.8m)follows:
87

T[m] Tonnage[t]

0.5

1.0 300400

1.5 700800

2.0 11001200

2.5 15001600

Note that according to the ToR, vessels for bulk cargo and container transport should be suggested. Therefore, a selfpropelled vessel (Section 8.1) was designed particularly for container transport, and a barge train was designed for bulk cargo, although discussions that followwouldbethesameforothercargo(generalcargo,containersetc.),theonlylimitation beingthedraughtofbargesandofapushboat. 8.2.1. Proposedfeaturesofapushboatconcept

Draught (T) 1.4 m maximum. Larger draught would certainly be desirable from a hydrodynamicpointofview,butifthereisaneedtopushaconvoyatextremelylowwaters (see Section 2.3.2), then 1.4 m is probably the maximum allowable draught. With the abovementioned draught, a propeller in a nozzle with a diameter of 1.5 m could accept power of up to 700 kW, making a threepropeller installation feasible. Furthermore, a standard Danube barge with a draught of 1.5 m will carry a bit less than 800 t, which is approximatelyhalfofthecarryingcapacityofafullyloadedbargeat2.5m.Itisadiscussible subject, but sailing at a lower draught than 1.5 m would probably not be costeffective. From this point of view, the pushboats draught of 1.4 m is also justified. Obviously the choiceofdraughtisthemostimportanttechnicalcompromiseinpushboatdesign. Triplescrew propulsion, (skewed) propellers in nozzles with a diameter (D) of 1.5 m, should be located in a relatively shallow tunnel. A somewhat larger propeller diameter wouldbeallowable(anddesirable),buttakingintoaccountthelimitedbreadthof11mand highspeeddiesels,itisbelievedthat1.5mwouldbejustsufficient.Withanenginepower of 700 kW, propeller loading would be 375 kW/m2, which is high, but is still acceptable. Specialattentionshouldbepaidtothedesignoftunnels,propellersandanozzleswiththe aim to increase ahead and astern thrust and reduce vibrations (model experiments are recommended). Breadth (B) 11 m, which is the same as a standard Danube barge. A somewhat larger breadthwouldnotbesoharmful,asthepushboatisusuallypushingamuchwiderbarge convoy.Evenifonlyonebargeispushed,asomewhatwiderpushboat(thanabarge)would not be so disadvantageous. Barge packing, however, is easier if both the pushboat and a bargehavethesamewidth.Nevertheless,ifdraughtislimited,theneitherthelengthora width(orboth)shouldsubstitutetheneededbuoyancy.Consequently,itwasdecidedto fixthebreadthto11m.
88

Length (L) of around 30 m,undertheconditionthereisenoughspaceforallnecessary machineryandcrew.Asomewhatlongervessel(ifBandTarefixed)wouldbeacceptable. With L=30 m, the overall length of a convoy of two barges and a pushboat would be 2x77+30=184m,whichisstillacceptableforpassingthroughDanubelocks(seeTables2.2 and5.1). Height (H) 2.5 m is considered to be minimal for fitting engines and other necessary machineroomequipmentbelowthedeck. Weight (dry) is estimated to be 270 t taking into account lightweight engines and other equipmentandmachinery.Alargervaluemightcompromisethedraughtandthereforethe projectitself.Afullyloadedpushboatwithfuelandotherprovisionsshouldbearound350t (at a level draught of 1.4 m). Weight saving should be considered wherever possible (SPS technologymightbeemployedforthesuperstructure). Ship form, and particularly the tunnels, is of utmost importance as relatively large power needstobeinstalledwithinanextremelyshallowdraughthull(seeFigures5.19and5.22). The transom and propellers should always have a draught of around 1.4 m, while weight variations(duetofuelconsumption)shouldchangethetrimandbowdraughtonly.Model experimentsarerecommended. PropulsionplantLowemissiondieselenginesof3x700kW,satisfyingStageIIIA/Tier3 norms or better (see Section 7.3.3) with relatively high power to weight ratio should be considered. Transmission of power should be via conventional horizontal shaftline and a gearbox (with somewhat higher reduction ratio), see Section 7.2.2. Main engines and gensets should be flexibly mounted to the motor girder to reduce noise and vibrations levels.Withinstalledpowerofaround2000kWsailingalongthewholeDanubewithapush trainofsixfullyloadedbarges(atT=2.5m,carryingaround1500to1600tofcargoeach)at usual convoy speeds is possible during most of the navigable season. Expected fuel consumptionwouldbearound10t/day. Shoretoshippowersupply(ofelectricitywhileinport,oftencalledcoldironing)shouldbe consideredwiththeaimtoreduceonboarddieselemissions. Steeringthreefishtailrudderslocatedbehindpropellers(withoutflankingrudders,see section7.2.3)andagondola type bow thruster(withelectricalmotor)ofaround300 kW shouldbeconsidered. Provisionsformax7days,meaningthat70t(around85m3)offuelshouldbeprovided. Nevertheless,althoughontheDanubeitisaccustomedtocarryrelativelylargequantitiesof fuel (often for a roundtrip), much smaller quantities and refuelling on the way should be considered as overall situation within the New Europe has changed. Carrying smaller quantitiesoffuelmightbeacosteffectivemeasure.

89

Crew members 8, according to UN ECE Recommendations. Accommodation premises shouldbeinonetiersuperstructureonthedeck(comprising4singleand2doublecabins, althoughthisdependsontheshipownersneeds/request).Livingpremisesshould befully airconditioned. Resiliently mounted superstructure (on pneumatic shock absorbers) for reducedvibrations,noiseandincreasedcomfortshouldalsobeconsidered(howeverthat wouldrequiresomewhatdifferentcabinarrangementthangivenontheGAplan). Wheelhouse with the possibility to be raisedtoincreasevisibilitytoatleast250m,as requestedbyUNECERecommendations.Whenloweredmaximalheightabovewaterlevel shouldbebelow6.3m,allowingsailingbelowallDanubebridges(excepttoontheUpper DanubeatHWL,seeTable2.2). Electronics and computerization should be of the latest technology, providing oneman watch operation of the vessel with engine and shipsystem monitoring and recording, voyageoptimization,etc.;seeSection7.4.

Everythingelseshouldbeasusualonapushboatofthissize,intendedfornavigationalongthe Danube River. Nevertheless, modern lightweight equipment and materials should be consideredwhereverpossible,aslargerweight(displacement,hencedraught)thanpredicted caneasilycompromiseeverypushboat. 8.2.2. Generalarrangementplanofapushboatconcept The General Arrangement (GA) plan of a pushboat concept is shown in Figure 8.6. The pushboatsmainparticularsarethefollowing: Loam Boam Hm Tm Heightabovebasislinem PBkW BowthrusterkW Crew 30.0 11.0 2.5 1.4 6.0 3x700 250300 8

90

Figure8.6GeneralArrangementplanofapushboatconcept n g o

91

8.2.3. Advantagesofaconceptcomparedtoconventionalpushboats Themainadvantageoftheproposedpushboatisitsextremelylowdraughtofonly1.4m (compared to draught of above 1.7 m of similar conventional pushboats). This enables navigationwithpartlyloadedbargesonthewholeDanubeevenatLNRL. A gondolatype bow thruster of 250 300 kW enables enhanced manoeuvring capa bilities, eliminating the necessity for conventional flanking rudders. Due to absence of flankingrudders,unobstructedwaterinflowtothenozzlescanbeachieved(hencehigher efficiency),whichisveryimportantparticularlyforhighlyloadedpropellers(duetolimited propellerdiameter,whichisaresultofdraughtlimitation). Application of the latest technological achievements that increase efficiency, safety, cleanliness and comfort (for instance: clean engines, the advising tempomaat, RIS equipment,resilientlymountedsuperstructureetc.).Nevertheless,thesebenefitsarenota result of the proposed pushboat concept, but rather of a modern era. Namely, almost all Danubepushboatswerebuilt30orsoyearsagoandthereforewereequippedaccordingto thestandardsbelongingtotheprevioustechnologicalgeneration,soanewlybuiltpushboat ofanydesignorconceptwillbeadvantageouscomparedtotheold(conventional)ones. 8.3. Conversionandretrofittingmeasuresthatcanleadtogreenernavigation Firstofall,gradualphasingoutofoldervesselsshouldbeconsidered.Anoldfornewpolicywas appliedontheRhine,sosimilarmeasureswithexperiencegainedsofaronthepatternRiver RhineshouldbeconsideredtobeemployedontheDanubetoo. The list of conversion and retrofitting measures with the aim to modernise existing vessels is endless. Only some of them those that reduce fuel consumption are mentioned below (accordingtoZigic2006): Replacementofold(usuallymediumspeed)withnew(usuallyhighspeed)enginesthis needsanewtransmissiongeartoo!Inthefirstplacemaintenancecostsarereduced,but fuelconsumptionandpollutantemissionsarereducedaswell. Replacementofpropellers/nozzlesorwholeafterbody(whenpropulsorsaredamagedso repair is not viable), or when engines are replaced. New stern+propellers+engines can reduceconsumptionupto13%. Lengtheningofahull(middlebody)orrebuildingofthecargoholdbyimplementingnew technologieswiththeaimtoreduceweight(withemploymentofSPSforinstance).

92

Artif ficial (and cheap) modif fication of p pre and/or aftbody of a pushing ship and pu f ushed barg to form a stumpen connect ge a nd tion (Figure 8.7) may r e reduce explo oitation costs by arou 5%. Stil this meas und ll, sure is seldom applied. Accordingly, formatio of pusht on trains (stum mpendconnection)wo ouldalsobec costeffectiv ve.

Figure8.7F Fullscaletes stswithapo olyurethanew wedgetomatchstumptransom ofabarg ge(Source:DST) Notetha atotherkind dsofmeasur resmightbe eundertaken ntoo(forinstancethosewhichenh hance manoeuv vrabilityand dsafety,ena ablevessels tocomplyw withnewrul lesetc.).Nev vertheless,s some essential features of existing vessels often cannot be changed nor thei character o d, ir ristics noticeablyimproved,whicheverreasonabletechnicalm measureswouldbeapplie ed. 8.4. Thecostofnewbuildings s

ectedcostfo orbuildingt theselfprop pelledvesselandpushbo oatconceptsarearound56 Theexpe millionand45millio onEuros,res spectively.T These,however,toagre eatextentde ependonch hosen equipme ent,shipyard d,material(steel)cost, timeoforderetc.Ther refore,variationsoford derof magnitud deofaround d10to20%totheabovementioned dmightbeexpected.Bythewayino order toreduce eproduction ncostsinlan ndvesselsno owadaysare eusuallybuil ltintwoorm morecompa anies. Typically thehullisb builtinalow wercostarea,suchasSe erbiaorChin na,andthen niscomplet tedin theNetherlandsorG Germanywherecostsarehigher. Retrofitti and conversion cost are impossible to be anticipated as they de ing ts e d epend on se everal factors.N Notehoweverthatduetoa)inadeq quatesafety yandenvironmentalpolicy(onceve essels are built and explo t oited), and b) general durability of river vessels and their equipm ment, shipowne ersofteninc clinetovario ousretrofitt tingorconve ersionpossib bilitiesrathe erthanscrap pping and building new vessels. Cons v sequently, a oldforn an new policy/s scheme sho ould probably be ube. initiatedontheDanu

93

9. CONCLUSIONS
ConcludingremarksweredrawnaftereachSection,sothereisnoneedtorepeatthemagain. Moreover, all of Section 8, ending with the custom designs of two typical Danube vessels selfpropelled and pushboat concepts, is a kind of conclusion, as most of the innovations and benefitsmentionedinprevioussectionswereincorporatedinthenewdesigns. It should be underlined, however, that contemporary (modern) shallow draught vessels, particularly suited for the Danube waterway, are feasible and desirable. The only problem is thatinherentlytheywillbelessefficientandlesscosteffective(ifwaterisdeepenough)than the vessels with deeper draught (see Figure 2.1). Besides, IWT (river vessels) in general have verystrongcompetitionfromothermodesrailwayandroadtransport,sounderthepresent circumstancestheremaybealimit(concerninglowdraughtnavigation)underwhichIWTwill notbecosteffectiveanymore,asothermodes(alreadymuchstrongerandbetterpositioned) will prevail. On the other side, when there is not enough water (when LNRL) low draught vesselswillhavealogisticaladvantagecomparedtodeeperdraughtpushboats,aswillbeable tonavigatealltheyearround. Consequently,underwhichconditionsIWTwillwork(i.e.whatwouldbeminimal/guaranteed water depth along the river and throughout the season, cost of fuel, taxes, eventual state subsidiesetc.)isapoliticalquestionwhichshouldalsobeinfluenced,amongstothers,bythe technical and ecological requirements of IWT. Ships were navigating in the past, often transporting a larger quantity of cargo than today (on the yearly basis) although navigational conditionswereworse(withalotofshallowsandfreeflowingsectors,seeforinstanceFigure 9.1), but the business environment was different than it is today (with pipelines, railway and roadinfrastructurepassingthroughtheDanubecorridor).

Figure9.1TowingwiththeassistanceofraillocomotivesinSipskikanal,Danubekm944+ 2200m,rightbank(currentspeedupto18km/h),from1918tillthebeginningof1970 (whenDjerdapdamwasbuilt)(Source:www.tkinfo.net)

94

REFERENCES
***AmendmentoftheRecommendationsonTechnicalRequirementsforInlandNavigationVessels, UNECEInlandTransportCommittee,2006. ***AustrianrivericebreakerwithAzipodPropulsion,Ship&BoatInt.,No6,RINA,London,1995. Balcu, A., ISPA measure 2002 RO 16 PA 011 Technical Assistance for the Improvement of the NavigationConditionsontheDanube,PPPresentation,TrapecS.A. Bilen, B., Innovations in River PushTrain Technology (in Serbian), Institute of Technical Sciences of SerbianAcademyofScienceandArt,Belgrade,1996. Bilen,B.,Zerjal,M.,AnewConceptofPushboatDesign,inPracticalDesignofShipsandMobileUnits, ElsevierScienceB.V.,1998. Blaauw, H., Radojcic, D., Thill, C., Zigic, B., Hekennberg, R., The four cases of CREATING, 2nd RINA SymposiumonCoastalships&Inlandwaterway,London,March2006. Brix,J.,editorManoeuvringTechnicalManual,SeehafenVerlagGmbH,Hamburg,1993. Bross,H.,KustenundBinnenmotorschiffemitspeziellerFlachwasserfahreigenschaftfurdenTransport vontrockenemundflussigemMassengutsowieStuckgutundContainer,VBD,2002. Carlton,J.S.,MarinePropellers&Propulsion,ButterworthHeinemann,London,1994. Cox,G.,Sex,LiesandWaveWake,RINAConferenceHydrodynamicsofHighSpeedCraft,London,2000. *** CREATING WP5 State of the art of existing hull and propulsor concepts, Internal report and presentationsregardingtheDanubeRoRovessel,Nov.2005. Crist,P.,GreenhouseGasEmissionsReductionPotentialfromInternational Shipping,OECD/ITF Joint TransportResearchCentreDiscussionPapers,2009/11,OECDpublishing,doi:10.1787/223743322616. ***CurrentStateofStandardisationandFutureStandardisationNeedsforIntermodalLoadingUnitsin Europe,FinalReportforPublication,fundedbyECFP4Programme. ***FuelCellswhatistheirmarinefuture,Ship&BoatInt.,No7/8,RINA,London,2003. ***FutureEmissionLimitsforNonRoadMobileMachinery(EUDirective97/68/EC). Doyle, R., Whittaker, T., Elsasser, B., A Study of Fast Ferry Wash in Shallow Water, FAST 2001, Southampton. Guesnet, T., Delius, A., Jastrzepski, T., Efficient Freight Transport on Shallow Inland Waterways ResultsoftheINBATR&DProject,9thSymposiumPRADS,LuebeckTravemuende,2004. Guesnet, T., Modern Concepts in the Design of Vessels for Inland Waters, Coastal Ships and Inland Waterways,RINA,1999. Hehle, M., Low Emission Diesel Engine Technology and Exhaust After treatment in Heavy Duty Operation,4thDanubeSummit,Constanta,June2008.

95

Heuser,H.,AnwendungbeimEntwurfvonBinnenschiffen,Schiffstechnik,Band33,Heft1,April1986. Hofman, M., Radoji, D., Resistance and Propulsion of Fast Ships in Shallow Water, Monograph, FacultyofMechanicalEngineering,UniversityofBelgrade,Belgrade,1997,(inSerbian). Hofman,M.,Kozarski,V.,ShallowWaterResistanceChartsforPreliminaryVesselDesign,International ShipbuildingProgress,DelftUniversityPress,Vol.47,No.449,2000. Hofman,M.,Inlandcontainervessel:Optimalcharacteristicsforaspecifiedwaterway,CoastalShips& InlandWaterwayII,RINA,2006. HofmanM.,MaksiI.,BakalovI.,SomeDisturbingAspectsofInlandVesselStabilityRules,Journalof ShipTechnology,Vol.2,No.2,NewDelhi,2006. Lewthwaite, J., Wash Measurements on Inland Waterways using the WAVETECTOR Buoy, RINA ConferenceonCoastalShips&InlandWaterways2,London,2006. Jastrzebski,T.,Sekulski,Z.,Taczala,M.,Graczyk,T.,Banasiak,W.,Zurawski,T.,AConceptoftheInland Waterway Barge Base on the IcoreR Steel Panel, European Inland Waterway Navigation Conf., Gyor, June2003. Jovanovic,M.,ShipDesign(inSerbian),UniversityofBelgrade,Belgrade,2002. *** Manual on Danube Navigation, Published by via donau Osterreichische Wasserstrassen GessellschaftmbH. ***ManualonDanubePorts,PublishedbyviadonauOsterreichischeWasserstrassenGessellschaft mbH. *** OECD Publication Inland Warerways & Environmental Protection, European Conference of MinistersofTransport(ECMT),ISBN9282113469,2006. ***PIANCWaterbornetransport,portsandwaterways:Areviewofclimatechangedrivers,impacts, responsesandmitigation,ClimateChangeandNavigation,2008. *** PIANC Guidelines for Managing Wake Wash from High Speed Vessels, Report of WG 41 of InternationalNavigationAssociation,Brussels,Belgium,2003. ***ThePowerofInlandNavigation,DutchInlandshippinginformationAgency(BVB). ***ProspectsonthedevelopmentofinfrastructureandnavigationontheDanube,viadonau,Vienna 2006. ***ProvisionalRulesfortheApplicationofSandwichPanelConstructiontoShipStructure,LR,2006. Radojcic, D., TipDriven Marine Propellers and Impellers a Novel Propulsion Concept, SNAME Propeller/ShaftingSymposium,VirginiaBeach,1997. Radojcic,D., PowerPredictionProcedureforFast SeaGoingMonohullsOperatinginShallowWater, TheShipforSupercriticalSpeed,19thDuisburgColloquium,May1998. Radojcic,D.,IntegrationoftheDanubeintoEuropeanintermodaltransportchainsthroughYURISand MUTANDprojects,The1stDanubeSummit,Constanta,June2002. 96

Radojcic, D., Danube Intermodal Ships Container vs. RoRo, The ship in intermodal traffic, 26th DuisburgColloquiumDuisburg,June2005. Radojcic,D.,NewOpportunitiesontheDanubeCorridor,RoRo2006,Ghent,May2006. Radojcic, D., On Engineering Greener Logistics on Inland Waterways, PP Presentation, RoRo 2008, Gothenburg,May2008. Radojcic, D., Bowless, J., On High speed Monohulls in Shallow Water, to be presented on Second ChesapeakePowerBoatSymposium(CPBS),Annapolis,2010. ***ResolutionNo.21PreventionofPollutionofInlandWaterwaysbyVesselsEconomicCommission forEurope,UNECE/TRANS/SC.3/179. ***RhineschifffahrtundKlimawandelNavigationontheRhineandClimateChangeAchallengeand anOpportunity,Bonn,June2009. ***RulesandRegulationsfortheClassificationofInlandWaterwaysShipsLR. *** Sandwich Plate System: an innovation in ship construction, Ship & Boat Int., No 9/10, RINA, London,2003. Schweighofer, J., Seiwerth, P., Environmental Performance of Inland Navigation, European Inland WaterwayNavigationConference,Visegrad,June2007. Schweighofer,J.,Blaauw,H.,VirtualGuidedTouroftheCleanestShip,4thDanubeSummit,Constanta, June2008. SPINRhine, Version 1 Innovative Types of Inland Ships and their Use on the River Rhine, its TributariesandtheAdjacentCanalsbyMueller,E.,VBD,Duisburg,2003. SPINWorkingPaper,InnovativeTransportVehiclesontheDanubeanditsTributaries,byRadojcic, D.,DPC,Belgrade,2004. Tieman, R., Practical Experience with the Adaption of the Inland Navigation Fleet to Changes in the Water Discharge and with the Reduction of Fuel Consumption, Navigation on the Rhine and Climate ChangeAchallengeandanOpportunity,Bonn,June2009. Zenczak, W., Michalski, R., Jastrzebski, T., Conceptions of Power Plant of Innovative PushBoat on ShallowWaters,EuropeanInlandWaterwayNavigationConf.,Gyor,June2003. Zibbel,H.G.,Mueller,E.,BinnenschiffefurextremflachesWasserErgebnissedesVEBISProjektes, Handb.D.Werften,Vol.XXIII,1996. Zibell,H.G.,NeueForschungsergebnissemitFlachwasserschiffen,BinnenschiffahrtZfB,Nr.10,May 1994. Zigic,B.,ModernisationoftheDanubefleetMatchingthefuturerequirements,3rdDanubeSummit, Budapest,Oct.2006. Zigic,B.,Optimalshipdesignforshallowwateroperation,4thDanubeSummit,Constanta,June2008.

97

Zoelner, J., Vortriebstechnische Entwicklungen in der Binnenschiffart, IST Symposium, New and FurtherDevelopment,Duisburg,2003. ***WaterTransportEnvironmentandSustainability,INE. Werft, van der K., INBISHIPTM Innovation in Inland Shipping, Int. Conf. on Coastal Ships and Inland Waterways,RINA,London,1999. *** WESKA 2002 Westeuropaeischer Schiffahrts und Hafenkalender, BinnenschifffahrtsVerlag GmbH,DuisburgRuhrort,2002. www.aircomposite.com www.ddrbinnenschifffahrt.de/schiffstypSSSElbe.htm www.dieselnet.com/standards/eu/nonroad.php www.dstorg.de/projekte/projekte/inbiship/ship.htm www.iesps.com www.imo.org www.inlandnavigation.org www.kliwas.de www.mercuriusgroup.nl www.naiades.info/wiki/index.php5/Category:Innovation_database www.nationalwaterwaysfoundation.org www.newlogistics.com www.panda.org www.RolsRoyce.com www.Schottel.com www.siemens.com www.smoothships.eu www.Vethmotoren.com www.voithturbo.com www.zemships.eu/en/service/downloads/index.php

98

APPENDICES
99

APPENDIX1
TheOECDPublicationInlandWarerways&EnvironmentalProtection,whosesummaryfollows,is regardedimportantasassessesthewaysinwhichtheEUWaterFrameworkDirectiveaffectsthe planningenvironmentforinternationalwaterwaysandsetsanewagendaforimprovingtheecological valueofwaterways.ThereportmakesrecommendationsongoodpracticeandidentifiestheDanube riverbasinasthecriticalareaforimprovement.Thisiswheretheeffortsofinternationalgovernmental organisationsandNGOscouldmostusefullybecombinedtodevelopabasinwideenvironmental protectionandwaterwaydevelopmentstrategy.

100

101

102

103

APPENDIX2 Impactsofclimatechange
(fromPIANCReportonclimatechangeandnavigation) The main goal of EnviCom Task Group 3 Climate Change and Navigation was to discuss the climate change related issues for the navigation sector and how to deal with the above mentioned problems and various project scenarios. Potential adaptation and mitigation responseswerealsoidentified. Climate change impacts inland navigation primarily through ice conditions, icing, extreme hydrologicalconditions,rivermorphology,windconditionsetc.Linksbetweendriversofchange andpotentialimpactsoninlandnavigationaredepictedinthefollowingfigure.

104

Potential impacts on navigation primarily in terms of water depth and velocity, resulting in changesinsedimentationandpresenceandabsenceoficearelistedinthefollowingtable

105

Ifnavigationconditionsarealteredoveralongerperiodsoftime(lowwaterlevelsforinstance) adaptationofthefleetandnewvesselsofdifferentdesignseemtobeinevitable.Thefollowing table summarizes some possible responses which, however, require additional investments and/orcausehigheroperationalcosts.

106

APPENDIX3 WaveWashProducedbyHighSpeedCraft[2ndCPBS,2010]
Fast vessels produce wave wash that is different than that of conventional ships and natural waves,havinglongperiodsandsignificantenergy.Theamplitudeoftheleadingwaveproduced byhighspeedcraftisnotsolarge(whencomparedtostormwaves,forinstance)butitdoes have a relatively long wave period. When these waves reach (get into) shallow water their height increases rapidly, often causing large and damaging surges on the beaches. They also arrive unexpectedly, often after the high speed craft has passed away. Consequently, wash restrictionswereimplementedonseveralsensitivehighspeedcraftroutes.Duringthelast20 yearsofevolution,washrestrictionswerefirstbasedonspeedlimits,thenwavewashheights, and ultimately by the limitation of energy produced by wash at certain distance from the vesselstrack.Accordingtothelatestfindingsbothwashheightandenergyareimportant;see forinstanceCox(2000)andDoyleetal.(2001). Concerning wash in the sheltered waters, it is only a vessels divergent waves which are relevant. A visual indicator of wave wash size is usually its height only; however the wave periodseemstobethecriticalfactorregardingdamage. Deepwater Asmentionedabove,wavewashrestrictionsarenowbasedontheenergyinthewavetrain.By usingthisapproachthewaveheightandperiodaretakenintoconsideration.Forexample,the StateofWashingtonrestrictwavewashenergy,E,tovaluesoflessthan2450J/matadistance of300moffthevesselstrack,or2825J/matadistanceof200moffthevesselstrack. Thedistancesfromthevesselareincludedintherequirementsbecausewaveheightdiminishes as the lateral distance from the sailing line increase. The decay rate in farfield (distances beyondtwowaterlinelengths)maybeobtainedfromtherelation1/x0.33,wherexisdistance perpendicular to ship track. It should be noted, however, that the wave period is nearly constantasdistancexchanges. Thecalculationsofwavewakeenergyperlinearlengthofwavefrontisgivenbythefollowing equation,inwhichtheperiod,T,isassociatedwiththemaximumwaveheight. E=(g2H2T2)/16=1960H2T2J/m. Shallowwater The characterization of shallow water waves is more complicated because wave period also varieswithdistancefromthesailingline.Longerandfasterwavestravelontheoutsideofwash
107

andhave ealargerKe elvinangleth hantheshorterandslowerwaves. Whenthew wavesarein nvery shallow w water and the supercrit t tical region, the first w , wave in the g group is usu ually the hig ghest. However as depth increases, th second o third wav typically b r, i he or ve becomes the highest. F e Figure 1 below depictswave epatternsinshallowwat terinsubcr ritical,critica alandsuper criticalregio on.

Combinedinfluenceoflengt thFroudenumber randdepthFroudenumberonwave eheightisdepicte ed(MichletSoftwa are,LeoLazausk kaswas

rvariouslengthFr roudenumbersan nddepthFrouden numbers).Theima agesinthecenter vertical employedto calculatesurfacewavepatternsfor oraconstantleng gthFroudenumberFnL0.43(excep ptthelastimage),whiledepthFrou udenumberincrea asesfrom0.65to2.5.On columnarefo theotherhan nd,theimagesint thecenterhorizon ntalrowhaveaconstantdepthFrou udenumber(Fnh=0 0.90),whilelength hFroudenumberincrease from0.26to 0.61.Thelastima agedepictswavesforthesupercriticalspeed,i.e.FnL> >0.7.Theprogress sionfromthetoptobottomofthe vertical figures illustr rates the wave pa attern changes ass sociated with tran nsitioning from th subcritical regim to the supercr he me ritical regime. Relative to this,thehorizontalfigures,all evaluatedforthe esamedepthFroudenumber,dep pictsomewhatdiff ferentwavepatte ernsandheightsw withthe differentleng gthFroudenumbe ers.Themiddlefig gurehasthemaxim mumwaveheightasFnh=0.9andFnL0.4. L

108

Theappropriatemeasureofwavewashinshallowwaterseemstobeboththewaveheightand waveenergy,whichcanbeobtainedfromthewavewashtrace(forinstance,typicalRhinebarge
wash (subcritical speed) at 30 m off vessel track, having height 0.47 m and period 3 sec, hence E=1030J/sat200misdepictedbelow).

Source:Lewthwaite2006

Asexpected,thelargestwavesoccuraroundFnh=1.Variationofwaveheightandenergywith depthFroudenumberrecordedatxLareshownbelow.

Source:Doyle,2001

109

Mostoftheenergyiscontainedinasinglelongperiodwavewithsmalldecayenergydispersion atadistance.Thedecayrateinshallowwaterissmallerthanindeepwaterandisafunctionof h/L ratio. The decay ratio at critical speeds is different than that in supercritical region, as shownbelow.Thisisacontributingfactortounexpectedlylargewavesinshallowwaterata largerdistancefromavesselstrack.Ifratioh/L>0.5,thewavesaremoreorlessthesameasin deepwater.

Source:Doyle,2001 LowWashHulls Naval architects are nowadays trying to identify a low wave wash hull form characteristics. Generally,foralowwasha)thespeedscorrespondingtoFnL=0.350.65shouldbeavoided,and b) displacement should be as low as possible while length should be as large as possible. According to Cox (2000) there is no sufficient evidence for claims that catamaran, multihull vessel,oranyotherformissignificantlybetterthanmonohulls(providedcomparisonismade betweencompetentdesigns).AccordingtoPIANC2003,highspeedcraftwavewashcannotbe reducedjustbyoptimizingthehullformandvariousdesignratiossincewaveperiodgenerally increaseswithspeedanddoesntdecayquickly,whichisimportantfornavigationparticularlyin shallowwater.

110

APPENDIX4 PossibleShipPollutants
Prevention of pollution by inland vessels is generally regulated by various international and nationalrules(seeUNECEResolutionNo.21,forinstance).OfparticularinterestareADNRules (InternationalCarriageofDangerousGoodsbyInlandWaterways)whichrepresentasetofregulations
whichplayanimportantroleincontrollingwaterpollutionbyinlandnavigationvessels.

As a consequence of abovementioned inland navigation vessels have to be equipped with appropriate technical means for collection, retention on board and transfer into reception facilities (shore based and floating) of waste generated on board. Possible ship pollutants are
indicatedinthefollowingFigure.

Source:Highlights3/2003AnewsletterpublishedbySSPA,Sweden

111

APPENDIX5

ApplicationofSPStoDanubeBargeHullStructure
Sandwich Plate or Panel System (SPS) consists of two plates with welded perimeter bars and withanelastomerinjectedbetweentoformasolidunit.In2006LRrevealedProvisionalRules for the Application of Sandwich Panel Construction to Ship Structure. The Rules cover construction procedures, scantling determination for primary supporting structures, framing arrangementsandmethodsofscantlingdeterminationforsteelsandwichpanels.TheRulesare in general applicable to monohull ships of normal forms, speed and proportions. As usually, applicationofSPSinanyareathatisnotspecifiedintheRules,requiresspecialconsiderationby LR. The overall philosophy of the Rules is to ensure that designs utilising steel sandwich construction are equivalent in strength and safety to conventional steel construction. The thickness of the top and bottom plate and core of the SPS is determined on basis of the scantlingsgivenfortheequivalentordinarysteelconstruction.TheassumedscantlingsofSPS construction are checked for strength by formula given in the Rules. If the strength is not satisfied, the chosen thickness has to be increased. The process is iterative. Welding is conductedviatheperimeterbar,seeconnectiondetailsbelow.

ThepurposeoftheinvestigationwastovalidatewhetherapplicationofSPSconstructiontoa Danubebargecanleadtosignificantweightreduction(40%orsoasreported,forinstance,by Jastrzebski 1993). A typical general cargo Danube barge of 77x11x2.8 m is chosen for this comparison. A conventional steel structure was evaluated according to LR Rules and RegulationsfortheClassificationofInlandWaterwaysShips(forgeneralcargo,bulkcarrierand containershiptype),whileProvisionalRuleswereusedforSPSstructures.

112

comparisonw wasmadebetweenfollo owingconce epts: Weightc a) A existing, convention An nallybuilt (mixed fram med) steel barge, built 30 years ago t ac ccordingtoYugoslavRe egisterofShi ippingRules, , andcalcu ulated(accordingtoLR)conventiona alsteelbarg gewithtwot typesofstru uctures b) m mixedframin ngsystem c) lo ongitudinalf framingsyste em, aswellas sinnovative(calculatedaccordingto otheProvisi ionalRules) d) SPSstructure e. udinal frami system is the type of ship stru ing ucture in wh hich all seco ondary structure A longitu stiffeners are set up longitudinally, while in a trans s u e sversally fra aming system all secon ndary structure estiffenersa arepositionedtransvers sally.Amixe edframings systemdeno otesheredo ouble bottomt tobetransv versallyfram med,whilethedoubles sideanddec ckarelongit tudinallyframed. Theexist tingbargeis sbuiltwith mixedframingsystem, whichisno owadaystypicallyapplie edfor inlandba argestructures.Conside eringtheloc calstrength requirements,sternand dbowstructures are assumed to be conventiona built an therefore remain the same in a cases. Fig ally nd e all gures tofthemidshipsectionofthebargesconsidere ed. belowrepresentpart

Mixedframed d tudinallybui iltbarge(cas se:c)calcula ated) M Longit cases:a)exis sting,andb) )calculated) (c


113

SPSconstruction(cased)c calculated) Weig ghtcomparis sonforgeneralcargoDa anubebarge(77x11x2.8m)forallfo ourconsidere ed cases sisshownbe elow.

STEEL T WEIGHT

Comm ment: Compl letesteelweight tisshownconsis stingofmiddleb bodyof67man ndbow&sterno of10m. TotallightweightofparticularJRBbar rgeis342t(stee elweight316ta andequipment2 26t). Weigh htofbow&stern nisassumedtobethesame(53 3t)inallcases.

114

Concludingremarks Duetothevariousexploitationreasonsthehullstructurescantlingsofthecalculatedbargesare oftenincreased,allowingthemtomeetstrengthrequirementsoveraprolongedperiod(more than 50 years). Consequently, the existing barge is heavier by around 12.5% than an equivalently framed calculated barge. If longitudinal framing would be used, this difference would be 18%, although a conventional steel structure was assumed for both cases. The innovativeSPSstructurewouldbelighterby22%,11%and5%respectively.Summarising,the innovativeSPSbargecanbelighterbyonlyupto10%thanaconventional(calculated)barge. Nevertheless, it seems that weight savings should first be examined within the conventional steel construction approach, and afterwards the innovative approaches, like SPS, could be examined. Notethatcontainerandbulkcargobarges(thatwerealsoanalysed)areheavierbyaround10% thanthegeneralcargobargesandthatasavingsduetoapplicationofSPSconstructionwould besmalleraround2to5%only.


115

AP PPENDIX6

Statistic csonInlandWaterw n wayTransp portandDa anubeTransport

Withintotalt W trafficenerg gyconsumpt tion Road+Rail+IW WT,IWTssh hareisonly ab bout1.5% (Source:EEA A)

Transportd distanceper rmodewith hfuel consumptio onof5lit/to on(Source:BVB)

Externa alcostofgoods transpo ort(Source: :BVB)

116

Energyconsumptionininland navigation(Source:ECDGfor energy&transport)


CONGESTIONIWThasnorestrictionsonfreightgrowth(allowableincreaseontheRhine andDanubeare4and10times,respectively).Furthermore,itistheonlymodewhichcan relievecongestedroadsandrailway.

RecentUSAstatistics(fromMaritimeTodayEnews,June17th2009)
AModalComparisonofFreightTransportationEffectsontheGeneralPublic www.nationalwaterwaysfoundation.org TheresearchteamfocusedonCarbonDioxide(CO2)emissions,whicharecurrentlythefocusofthe publicpolicydebateonGreenHouseGasses.UsingEPAparameters,theteamcalculatedhowmuch CO2isemittedpertonmileforeachmode.Emissionspertonmilearethoseemissionsexperiencedin movingonetonofcargoonemile.TheteamdeterminedthattheemissionsofCO2pergallonoffuel burnedareroughlythesameforeachmode,sothecomparisonfocusedonhowmuchcargogetsmoved forthatgallonoffuel.Theydeterminedthatcomparedtoinlandbargetransportation,railtransport generates39%moreCO2andtruckinggenerates371%moreCO2. Truckscanonlyproduce155tonmilesofcargomovementpergallonoffuelandcandeliveronly13,964 tonmilesofcargomovementforeachtonofCO2produced. Railroadsproduce413tonmilesofcargomovementpergallonoffuel,allowingthemto37,207.2tons milesofcargomovementpertonofCO2produced. Inlandtowboatsmovethemostcargopergallonoffuel576tonmilespergallonandthusproduce theleastamountofCO2emissionspertonmile,deliveringsome51,891tonmilesofcargomovement foreachtonofCO2emitted. Toputthesenumbersinperspective,theresearchteamcalculatedthatifallthecargothatmovedby bargein2005,theyearofthestudy,wereinsteadmovedbyrail,itwouldhaveresultedinanadditional 2.1milliontonsofCO2intheatmosphere.Ifthatsamecargohadmovedbytruck,itwouldhave generatedanadditional14.2milliontons. Regardingthesamesubject,seealsoCrist(2009)paperonGreenhouseGasEmissions(OECDpubl.).

117

Marketshare M edevelopme entof ca argotranspo ortontheDa anube (S Source:Mier rkaDonauha afen) TOTALFREIGHTRANS SPORTONT THEDANUBE E2007 Inmill liontons/ye ear

Source: :DanubeNa avigationinA Austria,AnnualReport2 2008,viadon nau


118

Danubefleet(2003)Source:ProspectsoftheDevelopment,viadonau Shiptype Number Capacity Averageage (1000t) (years)


Motorcargovessel Drycargobarges Tankers Tankbarges Pushboats TOTAL 104(6206) 1796(2522) 8(1390) 192(147) 283(675) 2631(10940) 160(6158) 2842(3348) 10(1771) 258(215) 3256(11492) 29(50) 24(29) 29(36) 41(34) 24(49) 26(44)

Comment: In the parentheses given are data for the Rhine vessels. Only vessels that are appropriate for the international trade are contained. Only vessels larger than 1000 t are containedfortheDanubestatistics.Pushboatswithengineslargerthan750kWarecontained fortheDanubestatistics.

EstimatedfleetdemandfortheDanubein2015(numberofvessels) Source:ProspectsoftheDevelopment,viadonau Shiptype Year2003 Totaldemand AdditionalDemand


Motorcargovessel Drycargobarges Tankers Tankbarges Pushboats TOTAL 104 1796 8 192 283 2631 293428 7691117 3855 112162 169246 13812008 189324 0 3047 0 0 219371

Comment: For details see the source document. Total demand and additional demand are given fromto as the number depends on actions undertaken for improving the navigation. Additional demandisconstructionofnewvesselsduetofleetmodernization.

119

APPENDIX7 RecentIMOActivities
It should be mentioned that IMOs Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) is, amongst others, developing measures to enhance energy efficiency in international shipping andtherebyreducegreenhousegasemissions.Thesearetechnicalandoperationalmeasures aswellaspossiblemarketbasedinstruments.Consequently,thefollowingwasintroduced: EnergyEfficiencyDesignIndex(EEDI)fornewships,onthebasisofexperiencegainedthrough its trial application over the past six months. The EEDI is meant to stimulate innovation and technical development of all the elements influencing the energy efficiency of a ship, thus makingitpossibletodesignandbuildintrinsicallyenergyefficientshipsofthefuture. Energy Efficiency Operational Index (EEOI), which enables operators to measure the fuel efficiencyofanexistingshipand,therefore,togagetheeffectivenessofanymeasuresadopted toreduceenergyconsumption.TheEEOIhasbeenappliedbyMemberStatesandtheshipping industry,onatrialbasisandsince2005,tohundredsofshipsinoperation;itprovidesafigure, expressed in grams of CO2 per tonne mile, for the efficiency of a specific ship, enabling comparisonofitsenergyorfuelefficiencytosimilarships. ShipEnergyManagementPlan(SEMP)incorporatesguidanceonbestpractices,whichinclude improvedvoyageplanning,speedandpoweroptimization,optimizedshiphandling,improved fleetmanagementandcargohandling,aswellasenergymanagementforindividualships. The above mentioned is a successor instrument to the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations FrameworkConventiononClimateChange(UNFCCC)andconcernsseagoingships,butsooner orlatersimilarmeasureswillhavetobeappliedtoinlandshipstoo.Inthecontextofthisstudy, EEDI,EEOIandSEMParerelatedtosubjectspresentedinSection7. MEPC is currently developing a Convention on ship recycling regulations for international shippingandforrecyclingactivities.Thenewconvention(expectedtoenterintoforcein2013) willprovideregulationsforthedesign,construction,operationandpreparationofshipssoasto facilitate safe and environmentally sound recycling, without compromising the safety and operational efficiency of ships; the operation of ship recycling facilities in a safe and environmentally sound manner; and the establishment of an appropriate enforcement mechanism for ship recycling, incorporating certification and reporting requirements. Consequently,everynewshipwillhavetoenterservicewithacertifiedInventoryofHazardous Materials(IHM)andtheshipyardwillberesponsibleforpreparingit.
120

121

Potrebbero piacerti anche